Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
DESCRIPTION
PTH-CONTAINING THERAPEUTIC/PROPHYLACTIC AGENT FOR
OSTEOPOROSIS, CHARACTERIZED IN THAT PTH IS ADMINISTERED ONCE A
WEEK IN A UNIT DOSE OF 100 to 200 units
TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001]
The present invention relates to a therapeutic or
prophylactic agent for osteoporosis that contains PTH as the
active ingredient. The present invention also relates to an
agent to inhibit or prevent bone fractures that contains PTH
as the active ingredient. In particular, the present invention
relates to the above-mentioned drug, characterized in that PTH
is administered once a week in a unit dose of 100 to 200
units.
BACKGROUND ART
[0002]
Osteoporosis is "a disease characterized by a decrease in
bone strength that poses an increased risk of bone fractures."
PTH (parathyroid hormone) preparations are currently known as
one agent for the treatment of osteoporosis.
[0003]
PTH is a hormone that contributes to regulation of the
blood calcium concentration, together with calcitonins and
vitamin D. For example, PTH is also known to promote calcium
absorption in the intestine by increasing active vitamin D3
production in the kidney in vivo (Non-patent Reference 1).
1
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0004]
Patent Reference 1 discloses a method of treating
osteoporosis that increases the bone density of the cancellous
bone of the osteoporosis patient without decreasing the bone
density of the cortical bone by subcutaneous administration of
a unit dose of 100 or 200 units of PTH to the osteoporosis
patient once a week over a period of 26 weeks.
[0005]
Thus, while Patent Reference 1 discloses that these
treatment methods simply lead to an increase in bone density,
it does not demonstrate whether or not the treatment method is
capable of increasing the bone strength of the osteoporosis
patient or decreasing the risk of bone fractures. PTH is also
only administered alone, not in combination with calcium
agents.
[0006]
Non-patent Reference 1 discloses that hypercalcemia was
seen in 11% of patients and that persistent hypercalcemia was
observed in 3% of them when blood samples were taken 4 to 6
hours after administration of PTH (20 g/day) to patients in a
clinical trial of PTH in the treatment of osteoporosis.
Furthermore, Non-patent Reference 1 also discloses that
treatment was discontinued due to persistent serum calcium
elevation in one of 541 patients even though the serum calcium
returned to normal in virtually all patients prior to the next
PTH administration.
2
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0007]
Although Non-patent Reference 2 discloses that there was
no clinical problem with the serum calcium after
administration of the drug when a daily subcutaneous PTH
preparation was administered together with a calcium agent, it
also reports that the serum calcium was elevated after
administration. Non-patent Reference 3 is the package insert
of the daily subcutaneous preparation disclosed in Non-patent
Reference 2. This insert reports in the disclosure of the
various adverse events occurring after administration of the
preparation that transient hypercalcemia was observed after
administration of the preparation. Furthermore, Non-patent
Reference 3 discloses that there have been adverse drug
reaction reports of hypercalcemia in postmarketing
surveillance of this preparation.
[0008]
Thus, Non-patent References 1 to 3 disclose instances of
hypercalcemia as an adverse drug reaction in the treatment of
osteoporosis by PTH and the like, and the treatment methods
disclosed therein cannot be called adequate in terms of
safety.
[0009]
Given this background, a highly safe and effective method
of treating osteoporosis by PTH was desired.
PRIOR ART REFERENCES
PATENT REFERENCES
3
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0010]
Patent Reference 1: JP Kokai H08-73376
Patent Reference 2: WO00/10596
Patent Reference 3: JP Kokai H05-306235
Patent Reference 4: JP Kokai S64-16799
Patent Reference 5: W002/002136
Patent Reference 6: JP Kokai 2003-095974
NON-PATENT REFERENCES
[0011]
Non-patent Reference 1: Paul D. Miller, MD, Current
Osteoporosis reports, Vol. 6, 12-16, 2008
Non-patent Reference 2: CLINICAL CALCIUM, Vol. 17, No. 1,
48-55, 2007
Non-patent Reference 3: FORTEO (registered trademark)
teriparatide (rDNA origin) injection 750 mcg/3 mL, 2008
Non-patent Reference 4: ADVANCES IN ENZYMOLOGY, 32, 221-
296, 1969
Non-patent Reference 5: Hoppe Seyler's Z. Physiol Chem.,
355, 415, 1974
Non-patent Reference 6: J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 259, No. 5,
3320, 1984
Non-patent Reference 7: Pthobiology annual, 11, 53, 1981
Non-patent Reference 8: J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 266, 2831-
2835, 1991
Non-patent Reference 9: Marcus. & Aurbach, G.D.,
Endocrinology 85, 801-810, 1969
4
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Non-patent Reference 10: "2006 Osteoporosis Prevention
and Treatment Guidelines" (Life Science Publishing Co.,Ltd.)
Non-patent Reference 11: M. Takai et al., Peptide
Chemistry 1979, 187-192, 1980
Non-patent Reference 12: H. Orimo, et al., Diagnostic
criteria for primary osteoporosis (1996 revised edition)
(1997) Journal of Bone And Mineral Metabolism 14; 219-233
Non-patent Reference 13: Diagnostic criteria for primary
osteoporosis and osteoporosis prevention and treatment
guidelines (H. Orimo, et al., 2006 Osteoporosis prevention and
treatment guidelines (2006) 34-35)
Non-patent Reference 14: Genant H.K. et al., J. Bone
Miner. Res., 8, 1137-1148, 1993
Non-patent Reference 15: N. Engl. J. Med., Vol. 344, No.
19, 1434-1441, 2001
Non-patent Reference 16: Clinical Diabetes, Vo. 22, No.
1, 10-20, 2004
Non-patent Reference 17: Kawasaki Medical Journal, 36(1),
23-33, 2010
Non-patent Reference 18: Bone, Vol. 32, 86-95, 2003
Non-patent Reference 19: Reports on Dentistry, 102(11):
853-868, 2002
.Non-patent Reference 20: Miner. Electrolyte Metab. 1995;
21(1-3): 201-4
Non-patent Reference 21: Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi
1995 Oct; 69(10): 1027-36
5
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Non-patent Reference 22: Calcif. Tissue Int. 2000 Mar;
66(3): 229-33
Non-patent Reference 23: N. Engl. J. Med., Vol. 358, No.
12, 1302-1304, 2008
Non-patent Reference 24: N. Engl. J. Med., Vol. 357, No.
20, 2028-2039, 2007
Non-patent Reference 25: Osteoporos. Int. 2003 Jan;
14 (1) : 77-81
Non-patent Reference 26: Osteoporos. Int. 2000; 11(5):
434-42
Non-patent Reference 27: J. Bone Miner. Res. 2000 May;
15(5): 944-51
Non-patent Reference 28: J. Clin. Invest. 1998 Oct 15;
102(8): 1627-33
Non-patent Reference 29: J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2001
Feb; 86(2): 511-6
Non-patent Reference 30: J. Bone Miner. Res. 2004 May;
19(5): 745-51. Epub 2004 Jan 19
Non-patent Reference 31: J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2009
Oct; 94(10): 3772-80. Epub 2009 Jul 7
Non-patent Reference 32: Osteoporos. Int. 2007; 18: 59-68
Non-patent Reference 33: J. Bone Miner. Res., Vol. 25,
No. 3, 472-481 (2010)
Non-patent Reference 34: Osteoporos. Int. 1999; 9: 296-
306
6
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Non-patent Reference 35: T. Inoue et al., Diagnostic
criteria for osteoporosis--Assessment of degree of bone loss
and vertebral deformity by simple vertebral roentgenogram.
Ministry of Health and Welfare Life Science Research Fund
Silver Science Research 1988 Report, 1990, 3.
Non-patent Reference 36: J. Bone Miner. Metab. 1998;
16 (1) : 27-33
Non-patent Reference 37: Proceedings of the 26th Meeting
of the Japanese Society for Bone and Mineral Research, 0-025,
147 (Oct. 2008)
Non-patent Reference 38: ASBMR 31st Annual Meeting,
"Weekly treatment with human parathyroid hormone (1-34) for 18
months increases bone strength via the amelioration of
microarchitecture, degree of mineralization, enzymatic and
non-enzymatic cross-links formation in ovariectomized
cynomolgus monkeys" (SA0044, FR0044).
Non-patent Reference 39: IOF World Congress on
Osteoporosis & 10th European Congress on Clinical and Economic
Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis "ONCE-WEEKLY
TREATMENT WITH TERIPARATIDE FOR 18 MONTHS INCREASES BONE
STRENGTH VIA THE AMELIORATE TRABECULAR ARCHITECTURE, COLLAGEN
ENZYMATIC AND NON-ENZYMATIC CROSS-LINK FORMATION IN
OVARIECTOMIZED CYNOMOLGUS MONKEYS"
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
PROBLEMS TO BE SOLVED BY THE INVENTION
[0012]
7
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The present invention provides a highly safe and
effective method for treating or preventing osteoporosis by
PTH. Furthermore, the present invention provides a highly safe
method for inhibiting or preventing bone fractures by PTH.
MEANS TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS
[0013]
As a result of in-depth research and development intended
to solve the above problems, the present inventors discovered
a highly safe and effective method of treating or preventing
osteoporosis, surprisingly enough, by limiting the PTH dose
and administration interval. They also discovered a highly
safe method of inhibiting/preventing bone fractures by
specifying the PTH dose and administration interval.
Furthermore, they also discovered that these methods are
especially effective in high-risk patients.
[0014]
Specifically, the present invention relates to the
following.
[1] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis that contains PTH as the active ingredient,
characterized in that it is used in conjunction with a calcium
agent and PTH is administered once a week in a unit dose of
100 to 200 units.
[2] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [1] above, characterized in that the calcium
8
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
agent used in combination is administered one or more times a
week.
[3] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [1] or [2] above, characterized in that the
calcium agent used in combination is administered in a dose of
200 to 800 mg/day as calcium.
[4] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [3] above wherein the above PTH
is human PTH (1-34).
[5] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to[4] above to be administered over
a duration exceeding 24 weeks or 48 weeks.
[6] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [5] above to treat osteoporosis
patients who satisfy all of the following conditions (1)
through (3) below:
(1) Age 65 years or older
(2) Prevalent bone fractures
(3) Bone density less than 80% of the young adult mean
and/or degree of bone atrophy of I or higher.
[7] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [6] above to treat or prevent
secondary osteoporosis caused by glucocorticoid or diabetic
osteoporosis.
[8] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [6] above to treat or prevent
9
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
osteoporosis having at least one of the diseases of (1)
through (8) below as a complication:
(1) Diabetes,
(2) Hypertension,
(3) Hyperlipidemia,
(4) Arthralgia,
(5) Osteoarthritis of the spine,
(6) Metatypical low back pain,
(7) Osteoarthritis of the hip,
(8) Osteoarthritis of the jaw.
[9] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [6] above to be administered to
an osteoporosis patient having a history of being administered
at least one of the osteoporosis therapeutic agents of (1)
through (6) below:
(1) Calcium L-aspartate
(2) Alfacalcidol,
(3) Elcatonin,
(4) Raloxifene hydrochloride,
(5) Menatetrenone,
(6) Calcium lactate.
[10] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [1] to [6] above to be administered to
osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction or
moderate renal dysfunction.
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[11] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [6] to [10] above wherein the above PTH
is human PTH (1-34).
[12] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of any of [6] to [11] above wherein the above
osteoporosis therapeutic agent containing PTH as the active
ingredient is a subcutaneous injection.
[13] A combination prepareation or treatment kit
consisting of an agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis listed in any of [1] to [12] above and at least
one drug of (1) through (6) below.
(1) Metoclopramide,
(2) Domperidone,
(3) Famotidine,
(4) Mosapride citrate,
(5) Lansoprazole,
(6) Rokushingan.
[14] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis that contains PTH as the active ingredient,
characterized in that PTH is administered once a week in a
unit dose of 100 to 200 units, the agent for the treatment or
prevention of osteoporosis being used to treat osteoporosis
patients who satisfy all of the following conditions (1)
through (3):
(1) Age 65 years or older
(2) Prevalent bone fractures
11
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
(3) Bone density less than 80% of the young adult mean
and/or degree of bone atrophy of I or higher.
[15] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis at high risk for bone fractures that contains PTH
as the active ingredient, characterized in that PTH is
administered once a week in a unit dose of 100 to 200 units.
[16] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis that contains PTH as the active ingredient,
characterized in that PTH is administered once a week in a
unit dose of 100 to 200 units, the agent for the treatment or
prevention of osteoporosis being used to treat or prevent
secondary osteoporosis caused by glucocorticoid or diabetic
osteoporosis.
[17] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis that contains PTH as the active ingredient,
characterized in that PTH is administered once a week in a
unit dose of 100 to 200 units, the agent for the treatment or
prevention of osteoporosis being administered to osteoporosis
patients having mild renal dysfunction or moderate renal
dysfunction.
[18] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures that contains PTH as the active ingredient,
characterized in that it is used in conjunction with a calcium
agent and PTH is administered once a week in a unit dose of
100 to 200 units.
12
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[19] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of [18] above, characterized in that the calcium
agent used in combination is administered one or more times a
week.
[20] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of [18] or [19] above, characterized in that the
calcium agent used in combination is administered in a dose of
200 to 800 mg/day as calcium.
[21] An agent for the inhibition of bone fractures of
any of [18] to [20] above wherein the above PTH is human PTH
(1-34).
[22] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of [18] to [21] above to be administered to subjects
who satisfy all of the following conditions (1) through (3):
(1) Age 65 years or older
(2) Prevalent bone fractures
(3) Bone density less than 80a of the young adult mean
and/or degree of bone atrophy of I or higher.
[23] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of [22] above wherein the above PTH is human PTH (1-
34).
[24] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of [22] or [23] above wherein the above agent for
the inhibition or prevention of bone fractures that contains
PTH as the active ingredient is a subcutaneous injection.
13
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[25] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of any of [18] to [24] above wherein the agent for
the inhibition or prevention of bone fractures is an agent for
the inhibition of multiple bone fractures or the prevention of
multiple bone fractures.
[26] An agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone
fractures of any of [18] to [25] above wherein the agent for
the inhibition or prevention of bone fractures is an agent for
the inhibition of worsening fractures or the prevention of
worsening fractures.
[27] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [14] or [15] above, the agent for the
treatment or prevention of osteoporosis being used to treat or
prevent secondary osteoporosis caused by glucocorticoid or
diabetic osteoporosis.
[28] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [14] or [15] above, the agent for the
treatment or prevention of osteoporosis being administered to
osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction or
moderate renal dysfunction.
[29] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [27] above, the agent for the treatment or
prevention of osteoporosis being administered to osteoporosis
patients having mild renal dysfunction or moderate renal
dysfunction.
14
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[30] An agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis of [16] above, the agent for the treatment or
prevention of osteoporosis being administered to osteoporosis
patients having mild renal dysfunction or moderate renal
dysfunction.
[31] A prevention or treatment method using a treatment
agent, prevention agent, drug, combination drug, or kit of any
of [1] to [30] above.
EFFECT OF THE INVENTION
[0015]
The osteoporosis therapeutic agent of the present
invention is highly safe and has excellent efficacy. The agent
for the inhibition or prevention of bone fractures of the
present invention is also highly safe and useful.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0016]
Figure 1 is a graph showing the changes in the serum
calcium concentration by administration group (high-risk
patients, low-risk patients);
Figure 2 shows the effects of administration of the test
drug on the changes over time in the incidence of new
vertebral fractures. The test drug group is listed as the
"PTH200 group" and the control group as the "P group;"
Figure 3 shows the effects of administration of the test
drug on the changes over time in the incidence of new
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
vertebral fractures. The test drug group is listed as the
"PTH200 group" and the control group as the "P group;"
Figure 4 shows the results on the changes in the urinary
calcium value when the test drug ("PTH200 group") or
control("P group") was administered to patients once a week
for 72 weeks. The ratio of the urinary calcium value/urinary
creatine value was compared before beginning administration
and in the weeks of observation. The urinary calcium was
measured at the start, after 12 weeks, after 24 weeks, after
48 weeks, and after 72 weeks. The standard concomitant drug
(610 mg of calcium, 400 IU of vitamin D3, and 30 mg of
magnesium) was taken once a day after dinner from the time of
consent to the end of the trial; and
Figure 5 shows the results on the changes in the
corrected serum calcium value when the test drug ("PTH200
group") or control ("P group") was administered to patients
once a week for 72 weeks. The serum calcium was measured at
the start, after 12 weeks, after 24 weeks, after 48 weeks, and
after 72 weeks. Serum calcium standard value: 8.4 to 10.4
mg/dL. The standard concomitant drug (610 mg of calcium, 400
IU of vitamin D3, and 30 mg of magnesium) was taken once a day
after dinner from the time of consent to the end of the trial.
MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
[0017]
The present invention is explained concretely below.
[0018]
16
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The present invention provides a method for the treatment
or prevention of osteoporosis or a method for the inhibition
or prevention of bone fractures using PTH, characterized in
that PTH is administered once a week in a unit dose of 100 to
200 units ("once a week" is also sometimes referred to as
"every week" hereinafter). The present invention also provides
an agent for the treatment or prevention of osteoporosis or an
agent for the inhibition or prevention of bone fractures
having PTH as the active ingredient, characterized in that PTH
is administered every week in a unit dose of 100 to 200 units.
Furthermore, the present invention provides the use of PTH to
produce the above agent for the treatment or prevention of
osteoporosis or the above agent for the inhibition or
prevention of bone fractures.
[0019]
I. Active ingredient
The PTH that is the active ingredient of the present
invention (sometimes referred to simply hereinafter as "PTH")
includes human PTH (1-84) which is human parathyroid hormone
and peptides of a molecular weight of about 4,000 to 10,000
having activity equivalent or similar to human PTH (1-84).
[0020]
PTH includes all of natural PTH, PTH produced by genetic
engineering techniques, and PTH synthesized by chemical
synthesis methods. PTH can be produced by genetic engineering
techniques that are themselves known (Non-patent Reference 8).
17
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Alternatively, PTH can be synthesized by peptide synthesis
methods that are themselves known (Non-patent Reference 11).
For example, it can be synthesized by a solid phase method
that extends a peptide chain from the C end on an insoluble
polymer carrier (Non-patent Reference 4). Furthermore, the
origin of the PTH of the present invention is not limited to
human and may include the rat, cow, pig, and the like.
[0021]
In this specification, human PTH (n-m) means a peptide
shown by a partial amino acid sequence consisting of from
number n to number m in the amino acid sequence of human PTH
(1-84). For example, human PTH (1-34) means a peptide shown by
a partial amino acid sequence consisting of from 1 to 34 in
the amino acid sequence of human PTH (1-84).
[0022]
The PTH that is the active ingredient of the present
invention may also be a salt formed with one, two, or more
kinds of volatile organic acids. Examples of volatile organic
acids include trifluoroacetic acid, formic acid, acetic acid,
and the like. Acetic acid can be given as a preferred example.
The ratio of the two when free PTH and a volatile organic acid
form a salt is not particularly restricted as long as a salt
is formed. For example, since human PTH (1-34) has nine basic
amino acid residues and four acidic amino acid residues in its
molecule, taking into consideration salt formation in these
molecules, the basic amino acid 5 residue can be made into a
18
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
chemical equivalent of acetic acid. For example, if an acetic
acid content represented by the acetic acid weight x
100(%)/peptide weight of human PTH (1-34) is used as the
amount of acetic acid, as one theory, the chemical equivalent
of acetic acid versus free human PTH (1-34) becomes
approximately 7.3% (wt%). In this specification, free human
PTH (1-34) sometimes is also called teriparatide, and the
acetate of teriparatide is sometimes also called teriparatide
acetate. The acetic acid content in teriparatide acetate is
not particularly restricted as long the teriparatide and
acetic acid form a salt. For example, it may be 7.3%, which is
the above theoretical chemical equivalent, or higher, or it
may be 0 to 1%. More concrete examples of the acetic acid
content in teriparatide are 1 to 70, preferably 2 to 6%. These
salts can be produced by methods that are themselves known
(Patent References 4 and 5).
[0023]
Examples of PTH include human PTH (1-84), human PTH (1-
34), human PTH (1-38), hPTH (Non-patent Reference 5), human
PTH (1-34) NH2, [Nle8' 18] human PTH (1-34), [Nle8' 18, Tyr34]human
PTH (1-34), [Nle8' 18] human PTH (1-34) NH2, [Nle8' 18, Tyr34]human
PTH (1-34) NH2, murine PTH (1-84), murine PTH (1-34), bovine
PTH (1-84), bovine PTH (1-34), bovine PTH (1-34) NH2, and the
like. Examples of preferred PTH are human PTH (1-84), human
PTH (1-38), human PTH (1-34), and human PTH (1-34) NH2 (Patent
Reference 3, etc.). Human PTH (1-34) is an example of
19
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
especially preferred PTH. Human PTH (1-34) obtained by
chemical synthesis is an example of even more preferred PTH,
and teriparatide acetate (Working Example 1) is an example of
most preferable PTH.
[0024]
II. Combined use with other drugs
In the results of a double-blind comparative clinical
trial of PTH used in combination with calcium agents conducted
by the present inventors with the occurrence of bone fractures
as the primary endpoint, the effect appeared early (after 24
or 26 weeks) and hypercalcemia was not confirmed as an adverse
event (Working Examples 1 and 2). Therefore, combined use with
other drugs is one characteristic of the osteoporosis
therapeutic agent or agent for the inhibition/prevention of
bone fractures of the present invention. Combined use with
other drugs means that the osteoporosis therapeutic agent or
agent for the inhibition/prevention of bone fractures of the
present invention is used in combination with another drug
(other drugs).
[0025]
Calcium can be given as a preferred example of another
drug in the present invention. However, saying combined use
with other drugs in the present invention does not exclude
further combined use with drugs other than these. Therefore,
preferred examples of combined use with calcium include:
combined use with calcium alone and
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
combined use with calcium and vitamin D (including
derivatives thereof) and/or magnesium alone.
Calcium agents can be given as examples of concrete
embodiments of other drugs, and preferred examples include:
(1) A calcium agent containing calcium as the active
pharmaceutical ingredient and
(2) A calcium agent containing calcium, vitamin D
(including derivatives thereof), and magnesium as active
pharmaceutical ingredients.
[0026]
The mode of the above combined use of the osteoporosis
therapeutic agent or agent for the inhibition/prevention of
bone fractures of the present invention and other drugs
(frequency of administration, route of administration, site of
administration, dose, and the like) is not particularly
restricted and can be decided as is appropriate by doctor's
prescription and the like in accordance with the patient.
[0027]
For example, when a calcium agent is used in combination
as the above other drug, this calcium agent may be
administered simultaneously with the osteoporosis therapeutic
agent or agent for the inhibition/prevention of bone fractures
of the present invention having PTH as the active ingredient
(in other words, once a week) or may be administered more
frequently from once to several times a day. Therefore, the
above other drug may be made into a combination preparation in
21
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
combination with the osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic or
agent for the inhibition/prevention of bone fractures of the
present invention or may be a separate preparation from the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic or agent for the
inhibition/prevention of bone fractures of the present
invention. Examples of such calcium agents include "New
Calcichew (trademark) D3" (sold by: Daiichi Sankyo Health Care,
manufactured and sold by: Nitto Pharmaceutical Industries,
Ltd.).
[0028]
Other drugs can also be administered by the same or a
different route of administration together or sequentially
(that is, at separate times) with the osteoporosis
therapeutic/prophylactic agent or agent to inhibit/prevent
bone fractures of the present invention. The form of the other
drugs is therefore not particularly restricted. Examples
include tablets, capsules, granules, and the like. When the
other drug is a calcium agent, it is preferably a calcium
agent containing a unit dose of 100 to 400 (preferably 150 to
350) mg as calcium. If a calcium agent containing a unit dose
of 100 to 400 mg as calcium is administered, for example, at a
dosage of two tablets per day according to the working example
of the present invention, 200 to 800 mg per day will be
administered as calcium. Possibilities, however, are not
limited to this.
[0029]
22
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Concrete examples of the above other drugs, in the case
of calcium agents, for example, include known drugs having as
the active ingredient precipitated calcium carbonate, calcium
lactate, calcium carbonate, calcium chloride, calcium
gluconate, calcium aspartate, calcium phosphate, calcium
hydrogen phosphate, calcium citrate, and the like. Drugs that
contain precipitated calcium carbonate are preferred.
Furthermore, this drug may contain as is appropriate
excipients, binders, disintegrating agents, glossing agents,
antacids, and the like.
[0030]
Vomiting, nausea, queasiness, dull feeling in the
stomach, gastric discomfort, heartburn, and other such
gastrointestinal symptoms are known to be observed transiently
in a certain percentage of patients administered PTH (Patent
Reference 6).
[0031]
As a result of testing the times of administration and
efficacy of various antiemetics to counteract the transient
nausea and vomiting associated with administration of the test
drug, the present inventors confirmed that Primperan (generic
name of the active ingredient: metoclopramide), Nauzelin
(generic name of the active ingredient: domperidone), Gaster D
(generic name of the active ingredient: famotidine), Gasmotin
(generic name of the active ingredient: mosapride citrate),
Takepron OD (generic name of the active ingredient:
23
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
lansoprazole) and rokushingan are effective against the nausea
and vomiting associated with PTH administration (Working
Example 2). Therefore, these antiemetics are preferred as
other drugs, and Nauzelin (generic name of the active
ingredient: domperidone), Gasmotin (generic name of the active
ingredient: mosapride citrate) and/or rokushingan can be given
as preferred examples. The dosage and administration of these
antiemetics can be established as is appropriate by the
physician or the like in according with the patient's symptoms
and other such factors.
[0032]
III. Administration period
The administration period of the osteoporosis
therapeutic/prophylactic agent or agent to inhibit/prevent
bone fractures of the present invention is not particularly
restricted and can be decided as is appropriate by the
physician or the like in accordance with the patient. The
present inventors conducted a double-blind comparative
clinical trial with the occurrence of bone fractures as the
primary endpoint using administration periods of 156 or
72 weeks. It was possible to confirm a significant inhibitory
effect on bone fractures by such administration in this trial,
and the effect appeared early (after 24 or 26 weeks) (Working
Examples 1 and 2). Furthermore, no new vertebral fractures
were found when administration went beyond 48 weeks (Working
Example 2). Therefore, examples of administration periods
24
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
include 24 weeks or longer, 26 weeks or longer, 48 weeks or
longer, 52 weeks or longer, 72 weeks or longer, and 78 weeks
or longer. Seventy-eight weeks or longer is most preferred.
Hypercalcemia was not confirmed as an adverse event in this
trial (Working Example 1).
[0033]
IV. Dose
As a result of a double-blind comparative clinical trial
using a unit dose of 100 or 200 units of PTH, the present
inventors found a significant inhibitory effect on bone
fractures by this administration, that the effect appeared
early (after 24 or 26 weeks), and that no hypercalcemia could
be confirmed as an adverse event (Working Examples 1 and 2).
[0034]
Therefore, one of the characteristics of the present
invention is that the unit dose is 100 to 200 units. Here, one
unit of PTH can be measured by activity measurement methods
that are themselves known (Non-patent Reference 9). The unit
dose is preferably 100 or 200 units, most preferably
200 units.
[0035]
V. Administration interval
As a result of a double-blind comparative clinical trial
in which PTH was administered once a week, the present
inventors found a significant inhibitory effect on bone
fractures by this administration, that the effect appeared
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
early (after 24 or 26 weeks), and that no hypercalcemia could
be confirmed as an adverse event (Working Examples 1 and 2).
An administration interval of once a week is therefore one
characteristic of the present invention.
[0036]
VI. Route of administration
The osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent
to inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention can
be administered by an administration route that matches the
form of the preparation. For example, when the osteoporosis
therapeutic or prophylactic or agent to inhibit or prevent
bone fractures of the present invention is an injection, it
can be administered intravenously, intra-arterially,
subcutaneously, intramuscularly, and the like. The present
inventors established the subcutaneous injection of PTH to
have excellent efficacy and safety (Working Examples 1 and 2).
Subcutaneous administration can therefore be given as a
preferred example of the route of administration in the
present invention.
[0037]
VII. Target diseases
Osteoporosis in the present invention is not particularly
restricted and includes both primary osteoporosis and
secondary osteoporosis. Examples of primary osteoporosis
include involutional osteoporosis (postmenopausal osteoporosis
and senile osteoporosis) and idiopathic osteoporosis
26
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
(postpregnancy osteoporosis, juvenile osteoporosis, and the
like). Secondary osteoporosis is osteoporosis triggered by a
specific disease, specific drug, or other such cause. Examples
of causes include specific drugs, rheumatoid arthritis,
diabetes, hyperthyroidism, sexual dysfunction, immobility,
nutrition, congenital diseases, and the like. Glucocorticoid
are an example of specific drugs. Osteoporosis that poses a
high risk of bone fractures is a preferred example of
osteoporosis in the present invention. The indication of the
present invention for osteoporosis posing a high risk of bone
fractures means that the present invention is indicated for
the following high-risk patients.
[0038]
The present inventors confirmed the efficacy and safety
of the present invention in a clinical trial conducted in
patients with primary osteoporosis(Working Examples 1 and 2).
Primary osteoporosis can therefore be given as a preferred
example of osteoporosis in the present invention, and
involutional osteoporosis can be given as an especially
preferred example.
[0039]
The present inventors confirmed the effect of the present
invention in a clinical trial conducted in primary
osteoporosis patients who took glucocorticoid that trigger
secondary osteoporosis (Working Example 2). Primary
osteoporosis patients who take glucocorticoid that trigger
27
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
secondary osteoporosis can therefore be given as a preferred
example of primary osteoporosis patients in the present
invention.
[0040]
The present inventors confirmed the effect of the present
invention in a clinical trial conducted in primary
osteoporosis patients having complications (diabetes,
hypertension, or hyperlipidemia) (Working Example 2).
Osteoporosis patients having at least one complication among
diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia can therefore be
given as a preferred example of osteoporosis patients in the
present invention, and primary osteoporosis patients having at
least one complication among diabetes, hypertension, and
hyperlipidemia can be given as a more preferred example.
[0041]
Diabetes is known to very likely be an osteoporotic bone
fracture risk factor (Non-patent Reference 16).
[0042]
The following reports are found involving animal studies
of the relationship between diabetic osteoporosis and PTH.
1) Administration of PTH to streptozotocin-treated rats
that exhibited diabetic bone loss is reported to increase
"bone volume," "trabecular thickness," "osteoid surface,"
"mineralized surface," "mineral apposition rate," and "bone
formation rate" in the cancellous envelope and to increase
"osteoid surface," "mineralized surface," "mineral apposition
28
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
rate," and "cortical bone thickness" in the endocortical
envelope (Non-patent Reference 21). However, unlike rats with
bone loss due to other causes, no remarkable decrease in
eroded surface is seen in these rats.
2) Recovery of cancellous bone volume and turnover is
reported as a result of administration of PTH over eight weeks
to streptozotocin-treated rats (Non-patent Reference 22).
3) The response to hPTH (1-34) is reported to drop
(deterioration of the effectiveness of PTH) upon exposure to
high-concentration glucose in experiments in cultured cells
(Non-patent Reference 20).
[0043]
The present inventors found that many physicians and the
like expect PTH administration to be effective in human
patients with diabetic osteoporosis (e.g.:
http://www.richbone.com/kotsusoshosho/basic_shindan/tonyo.htm)
but on the other hand discovered no papers that prove this
effect.
[0044]
It is therefore important that these trials proved that
the osteoporosis therapeutic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention
reduces the risk of vertebral fractures in patients having
primary osteoporosis complicated by diabetes.
[0045]
29
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The bone fractures in the present invention are not
particularly restricted. They include both vertebral and non-
vertebral fractures (Working Example 1) and pathological
fractures caused by osteoporosis, osteogenesis imperfecta,
bone tumors, and the like and traumatic fractures caused by
traffic accidents, blows, and the like. Preferred examples are
application to fractures caused by osteoporosis, more
preferably vertebral fractures caused by osteoporosis. The
site of the fracture is also not particularly restricted.
Typical examples also include vertebral compression fractures,
fractures of the neck of the femur, intertrochanteric
fractures of the femur, fractures of the shaft of the femur,
fractures of the neck of the humerus, and fractures of the
distal radius. Vertebral compression fractures can be given as
a particular example.
[0046]
The number of bone fractures is not particularly
restricted in the present invention and includes both single
fractures and multiple fractures. The term single fracture
means a disease state in which the bone is broken or cracked
at only one location. Multiple fractures means a disease
Ostate in which the bone is broken or cracked in two or more
locations. The number of fractures in multiple fractures is
not particularly restricted, but application to 2 to 4
fractures is preferred.
[0047]
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The vertebral fractures in the present invention also
include both new fractures and worsening fractures. For
example, the extent of deformity can be classified by grade by
examining the shape of the entire vertebra and is generally
classified as grade 0 (normal), grade 1 (decrease of
approximately 20 to 25% in vertebral height and decrease of 10
to 20% in vertebral area), grade 2 (decrease of approximately
25 to 40% in vertebral height and decrease of 20 to 40% in
vertebral area), and grade 3 (decrease of approximately 40% or
more in vertebral height and decrease of 40% or more in
vertebral area). New and worsening [fractures] can be
classified by the grade increase pattern according to the
criteria of Genant. Concretely speaking, a fracture is
diagnosed as a new fracture when a change is found from grade
0 to grade 1, 2, or 3. It can be regarded as a worsening
fracture when a change is found from grade 1 to grade 2 or 3
or from grade 2 to grade 3. The vertebral height was measured
according to the method of Inoue et al. (Non-patent reference
35) and the method of Hayashi et al. (Non-patent Reference 36)
to accurately assess the changes in grade.
[0048]
In a clinical trial conducted in patients having
prevalent fractures, the present inventors proved the
inhibitory effect of the present invention on worsening
fractures (Working Example 2). Patients having prevalent bone
fractures can therefore be given as preferred examples, and
31
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
patients having prevalent bone fractures and the possibility
of worsening fractures can be given as even more preferred
examples as osteoporosis patients in the present invention.
[0049]
Many aspects of the mechanism of the bone strength-
enhancing effect of PTH remain unclear. Bone strength reflects
not only bone density but also bone quality. This means that
not only bone density but also bone microstructures,
mineralization, and other such bone quality factors determine
bone strength (Non-patent Reference 17). The present inventors
believe that bone quality may affect not only bone strength
but also the risk of developing diseases other than
osteoporosis and the curative results of complications
thereof. The possibility has been suggested that the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention is
superior to existing therapeutic agents (Patent Reference 2)
in this regard.
[0050]
Patent Reference 2 discloses that not only the bone
mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD) but also
the bone area of the lumbar spine, femur, and the like were
increased as a result of administration of rhPTH (1-34) to
osteoporosis patients. An increase in bone area means
thickening along the outside of the bone.
[0051]
32
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
However, the cortical bone thickness increased on the
inside of the bone rather than the outside as a result of
administering the osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent
and agent to inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present
invention to osteoporosis patients. In other words, virtually
no change was found in the thickness of the bone as a whole.
This mechanism is believed to have the following clinical
significance.
[0052]
(1) No joint damage due to thickening of the long bones
The femur, which is one of the long bones (long bones
that construct the four limbs), has its epiphysis in contact
with the joint cartilage and forms the knee joint together
with the synovium and meniscus. The contact surface is called
the joint surface and is covered with cartilage several
millimeters thick. Osteoarthritis of the knee can be given as
an example of a disease that causes knee joint pain.
[0053]
On the other hand, Forteo (PTH for daily administration)
is known to have a stronger bone strengthening effect than
Fosamax in patients having prednisone-induced osteoporosis
complicated by arthralgia (Non-patent References 23 and 24).
[0054]
However, this Forteo administration is a conventional
treatment method substantially equivalent to the PTH
administration described in Patent Reference 2, and
33
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
conventional methods are treatment methods that thicken the
outside of the bone, as was mentioned above. Thickening of the
outside of the femur means an increase in the area of the
joint surface. Since the number of cartilage cells does not
increase in proportion to the thickening of the bone, the
thickening of the outside of the femur induced by this
conventional treatment method can promote destruction of the
joint via damage to the cartilage cells triggered or
exacerbated by the increase in joint surface.
[0055]
However, thickening on the inside of the femur as in the
present invention stabilizes the cartilage without increasing
the joint area. The inventors believe that as a result there
is a possibility that it does not increase the burden on the
cartilage and in essence does not promote joint destruction.
This suggests the possibility that osteoporosis treatment by
this drug is a superior treatment for the joints in comparison
to osteoporosis treatment by the above conventional method.
[0056]
(2) Osteoarthritis of the spine is not exacerbated or
induced by thickening of the vertebrae
The normal vertebral bone mass decreases and the
vertebrae become unstable for some reason, such as aging.
Destabilization begins with deformation of the end plates.
Destabilization of the vertebrae specifically means thinning
of the end plates and widening of the end plate holes
34
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
(Haversian canals). As this destabilization advances,
penetration of the intervertebral disks into the end plate
holes and narrowing of the intervertebral disks are seen. As
the symptoms advance further, osteophytes form due to impact
between the vertebrae. Such degeneration of the spine is a
condition called osteoarthritis of the spine. When
osteoarthritis of the spine develops, it produces pain caused
by penetration of the intervertebral disks due to
intervertebral stabilization, pain due to swelling of the
surrounding muscle, and the like.
[00571
However, when the outside of the bone is thickened by
daily administration of PTH as described in Patent Reference
2, there is a possibility that an adequate inhibitory effect
on widening of the end plate holes will not be seen. There is
also a possibility that an increase in the contact area
between the vertebrae and the intervertebral disks will shrink
the distance between the vertebrae and promote destabilization
of the vertebrae, resulting in an increased risk of the
development or exacerbation of osteoarthritis of the spine.
[00581
On the other hand, since the osteoporosis therapeutic
agent and agent to inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the
present invention increase the cortical bone thickness on the
inside of the bone rather than the outside, there is a
possibility that widening of the end plate holes and
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
penetration of the intervertebral disks into the end plate
holes can be adequately inhibited.
[00591
(3) Does not exacerbate or promote the development of
osteoarthritis of the hip or osteoarthritis of the jaw
Osteoarthritis of the hip is a condition in which the
acetabulum that forms the hip joint and the joint cartilage of
the contact surface with the femoral head become worn,
degenerate, and undergo irreversible changes, caused by poor
blood flow to the joint and extreme weight and overuse. The
femoral cortical bone area of patients with osteoarthritis of
the hip is significantly larger than that of normal persons
(Non-patent Reference 18). An increase in the femoral cortical
bone area means thickening of the outside of the femur. There
is consequently a possibility that this will contribute to the
development or exacerbate osteoarthritis of the hip. When the
inside of the femur is thickened as in the present invention,
there is a possibility that the risk of development or
exacerbation of osteoarthritis of the hip will not be
increased since the outside of the femur is not thickened.
Deformity of the jaw joint is the main sign of osteoarthritis
of the jaw, but thickening of the cortical bone is one of the
clinical findings (Non-patent Reference 19). Therefore, there
is a possibility that further thickening of the outside of the
cortical bone will exacerbate the symptoms or induce onset.
When the inside of the bone is thickened as in the present
36
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
invention, there is assumed to be a possibility that such risk
of development or exacerbation of osteoarthritis of the jaw
will not be increased.
[0060]
To bring together (1) to (3) above, osteoporosis patients
having at least one complication consisting of arthralgia,
osteoarthritis of the spine, metatypical low back pain,
osteoarthritis of the hip, and osteoarthritis of the jaw
(preferably primary osteoporosis patients among them) can be
given as preferred examples of patients for whom the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention is
indicated.
[0061]
The present inventors evaluated the effects of other
osteoporosis drugs taken within one year on the efficacy of
this drug. As a result, it became clear that the efficacy of
the test drug is higher in primary osteoporosis patients who
have a history of taking other osteoporosis drugs than in
those who do not (Working Example 2). Therefore, osteoporosis
patients who have a history of taking other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents can be given as a preferred example of
osteoporosis patients in the present invention, and
application to primary osteoporosis patients who have a
history of taking other osteoporosis therapeutic agents is
even more preferred.
37
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0062]
Examples of other osteoporosis therapeutic agents include
calcium L-aspartate, Alfacalcidol, raloxifene hydrochloride,
elcatonin, menatetrenone, and calcium lactate. Preferred
examples are calcium L-aspartate, Alfacalcidol, and elcatonin.
The other osteoporosis therapeutic agents may have been given
individually or in combination.
[0063]
The osteoporosis therapeutic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention is
preferably administered for 24 to 72 weeks or longer to
osteoporosis patients who have a history of taking other
osteoporosis therapeutic agents. Administration for 24 weeks
or longer is especially preferred for patients having a high
risk of lumbar vertebral fractures, and administration for 72
weeks or longer is especially preferred for patients having a
high risk of fractures of the neck of the femur or the
proximal femur.
[0064]
The incidence of osteoporosis and renal dysfunction
increases with age. A large-scale epidemiological research
report states that 850 of female osteoporosis patients have
mild to moderate renal dysfunction (Non-patent Reference 32).
It is therefore important to provide a drug that is safe and
effective for osteoporosis patients who have renal
dysfunction.
38
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0065]
The present inventors have demonstrated that the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention is
effective in osteoporosis patients having normal renal
function, osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction,
and osteoporosis patients having moderate renal dysfunction
(Working Example 2). Moreover, they clarified that the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention has
equal safety in terms of serum calcium in all of these groups.
[0066]
Normal renal function, dysfunction, and the degree of
dysfunction can be classified based on the creatinine
clearance. Concretely speaking, creatinine clearance of 80
mL/min or higher can be assessed as normal renal function,
from 50 to less than 80 mL/min as mild renal dysfunction, and
from 30 to less than 50 mL/min as moderate renal dysfunction.
[0067]
The upper limit of normal of the serum calcium is
generally 10.6 mg/mL. Above this, 11.0 mg/mL can be called
slightly high. In conventional daily administration of PTH,
11.760 of osteoporosis patients having moderate renal
dysfunction were found to have serum calcium exceeding
11.0 mg/mL, which is slightly high, after administration (Non-
patent Reference 32). However, not even one patient with serum
39
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
calcium exceeding 11.0 mg/mL could be found at any time of
testing from the start to end of administration when the
osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent to
inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention was
administered to osteoporosis patients having moderate renal
dysfunction in the present invention (Working Example 2). In
other words, the osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic and
agent to inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present
invention appears to be superior not only in terms of efficacy
but also safety. Osteoporosis patients having mild renal
dysfunction and/or osteoporosis patients having moderate renal
dysfunction can therefore be given as examples of patients for
whom the present invention is indicated. More preferred
examples include primary osteoporosis patients having mild
renal dysfunction and/or primary osteoporosis patients having
moderate renal dysfunction.
[0068]
The race, age, gender, height, weight, and the like of
the subjects for whom the drug administration or treatment
method of the present invention is indicated are not
particularly restricted, but osteoporosis patients are
examples of these subjects. It is desirable to apply the
method of the present invention or administer the osteoporosis
therapeutic agent or agent to inhibit or prevent bone
fractures of the present invention to osteoporosis patients
having many risk factors for bone fractures in osteoporosis.
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Risk factors for bone fractures in osteoporosis include age,
gender, low bone density, prevalent bone fractures, smoking,
alcohol consumption, steroid use, family history of bone
fractures, exercise, factors related to falls, bone metabolism
markers, weight, calcium intake, and the like (Non-patent
Reference 10). However, osteoporosis patients (or subjects)
who satisfy all of the following conditions (1) through (3)
are defined as "high-risk patients" in the present invention.
(1) Age 65 years or older
(2) prevalent bone fractures
(3) Bone density less than 800 of the young adult mean
and/or degree of bone atrophy of I or higher.
[0069]
Here, the bone density typically means the bone mineral
density of the lumbar spine. However, when it is difficult to
evaluate the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine, the
bone density can be represented by the bone mineral density of
the radius, second metacarpal, neck of the femur, or
calcaneus. The young adult mean means the average bone density
of 20 to 44-year olds. The bone density can be measured by
methods that are themselves known, for example, dual-energy x-
ray absorptiometry, photodensitometry, photon absorptiometry,
quantitative CT scan, quantitative ultrasonography, and the
like. The degree of bone atrophy means the degree of bone
weight loss on an x-ray in the present invention. The degree
of bone atrophy is classified as no bone atrophy, bone atrophy
41
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
grade I, bone atrophy grade II, and bone atrophy grade III. No
bone atrophy in this scale means a normal condition, that is,
a condition in which the trabecular structure cannot be
recognized because the latitudinal and longitudinal trabeculae
are dense. Grade I bone atrophy means that the longitudinal
trabeculae are prominent. Typically, the longitudinal
trabeculae are thin and visible but still arranged densely. It
also means a state in which the vertebral end plates are
prominent. Grade II bone atrophy in this scale means a state
in which the longitudinal trabeculae have become rough, appear
thick, and are roughly arranged, and the vertebral end plates
are also lighter. Grade III bone atrophy in this scale means
that the longitudinal trabeculae have become indistinct, the
vertebral shadows overall appear blurry, and the difference
from the shadows of the intervertebral disks is reduced
(Osteoporosis Treatment, 5/3, July 2006 number, "Diagnosis of
osteoporosis by simple x-ray"). The degree of bone atrophy can
be assessed, for example, from lateral x-rays of the lumbar
spine. The number of vertebral fractures in the present
invention can be measured easily, for example, by the method
of Genant et al. (Non-patent Reference 14). Bone fractures at
locations other than the vertebrae can be confirmed easily,
for example, using roentgen film.
[0070]
It is especially preferable in the present invention to
apply the method of the present invention or to administer the
42
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
osteoporosis therapeutic agent, prophylactic agent, or the
agent to inhibit or prevent bone fractures of the present
invention to high-risk patients in particular (Working Example
1).
[0071]
On the other hand, it is generally preferable to avoid
applying the method of the present invention or administering
the osteoporosis therapeutic agent, prophylactic agent, or the
agent to inhibit or prevent bone fractures of the present
invention to patients (subjects) to whom any of the following
(1) to (6) pertain.
(1) Patients with bronchial asthma or a tendency to rash
(erythema, urticaria, and the like), and other such
hypersensitivity responses
(2) Patients with hypercalcemia
(3) Women who are pregnant or might become pregnant
(4) Patients with hypothyroidism or hyperparathyroidism
(5) Patients who have exhibited drug hypersensitivity in
the past
(6) Patients having heart disease, liver disease, kidney
disease, or other such serious complications
Therefore, the above high-risk patients and osteoporosis
patients to whom none of the above (1) through (6) pertain are
the preferred subjects in the present invention.
[0072]
VIII. Preparation
43
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent
to inhibit/prevent bone fractures of the present invention
(sometimes referred to simply hereinafter as "this drug") can
take on the form of various preparations. This drug is
generally made into an injection of PTH alone or together with
an ordinary pharmacologically acceptable carrier. An injection
is the preferred form of this drug.
[0073]
For example, when this drug is an injection, it can be
prepared by dissolving PTH in a suitable solvent (sterilized
water, buffer, physiological saline solution, or the like),
sterilizing the solution by filtration by a filter or the like
and/or another appropriate method, and dispensing it into
sterile containers. It is preferable in this case to add any
necessary additives (for example, excipients, stabilizers,
dissolution auxiliaries, antioxidants, analgesics, isotonizing
agents, pH regulators, preservatives, and the like) together
with the PTH. Examples of such additives include sugars, amino
acids, sodium chloride, and the like. When sugars are used as
additives, it is preferable to add one weight or more
(preferably 50 to 1000 weights) of mannitol, glucose,
sorbitol, inositol, sucrose, maltose, lactose, or trehalose as
sugars per weight of PTH. When sugars and sodium chloride are
used as additives, it is preferable to add 1/1000 to 1/5
weight (preferably 1/100 to 1/10 weight) of sodium chloride
per weight of sugars.
44
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0074]
For example, when this drug is an injection, this drug
may be solidified by freeze drying or another such means
(freeze-dried preparation or the like) and may be dissolved in
an appropriate solvent at the time of use. Alternatively, when
this drug is an injection, this drug may be a liquid dissolved
in advance.
[0075]
This drug is preferably housed in a package that states
that a unit dose of 100 to 200 units of human PTH (1-34)
should be administered weekly as an osteoporosis therapeutic
agent and agent to inhibit/prevent bone fractures or housed in
a package together with a package insert that contains this
statement.
[0076]
Furthermore, the utility of the present invention can be
confirmed easily by statistical treatment of the results of
the clinical trials that appear in the working examples by the
usual methods. The present invention is explained more
concretely below through working examples, but the scope of
the present invention is not limited to the following working
examples.
WORKING EXAMPLES
[0077]
(Working Example 1)
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Male and female patients diagnosed with primary
osteoporosis (Non-patent Reference 12) were subcutaneously
administered 5 or 100 units of teriparatide acetate, prepared
by the method of Takai (Patent References 4 and 5 and Non-
patent Reference 11), once a week (designated respectively as
the 5 unit group or 100 unit group). Furthermore, the activity
of the teriparatide acetate was measured according to the
paper of Marcus et al. (Non-patent Reference 9).
[0078]
In the 5 and 100 unit groups, a freeze-dried preparation
containing 5 or 100 units of teriparatide acetate per vial was
dissolved in 1 mL of physiological saline solution, and the
entire volume of solution was administered. Both the 5 and
100 unit groups were administered two tablets of a calcium
agent (containing 500 mg of precipitated calcium carbonate
[200 mg as calcium] per tablet) once a day.
[0079]
The osteoporosis patients were classified as condition
shown in Table 1 based on the bone fracture risk factors
present, as in Non-patent Reference 13, and compared. High-
risk patients were defined as having all three factors
involving age, prevalent vertebral fractures, and bone density
or bone atrophy; low-risk patients were defined as other than
the above.
46
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0080] [Table 1]
Table 1. Classification by bone fracture risk factors
Risk factor High-risk patients Low-risk patients
Age 65 years or older Less than 65 years
Prevalent vertebral
One or more None
fractures
Evaluation of bone Less than 80% of the 800 of the young adult
density or bone young adult mean** or mean or higher or
atrophy* atrophy grade I or normal atrophy grade
higher
*Bone density evaluated by x-ray
**Young adult mean: Average bone density of 20 to 44-year-olds
Tables 2 and 3 show the patient background. No
statistically significant differences could be found in the
background of the two groups (p < 0.05).
[0081] [Table 2]
Table 2. Patient background of the 5 and 100 unit groups in
high-risk patients
Mean standard deviation
No. of Lumbar spine
Group No. of Age (years) prevalent bone mineral
subjects vertebral density (o*)
fractures
5 unit group 64 73.9 4.6 2.3 1.2 63.4 11.6
100 unit group 52 73.9 5.3 2.1 1.2 67.9 15.5
*Value taking the young adult mean as 1000
[Table 3]
Table 3. Patient background of the 5 and 100 unit groups in
low-risk patients
Mean standard deviation
No. of Lumbar spine
No. of prevalent
Group subjects Age (years) vertebral bone mineral
density (%*)
fractures
5 unit group 10 57.9 5.1 1.8 0.9 68.3 8.8
100 unit group 11 61.5 2.4 2.4 1.2 59.9 1.9
*Value taking the young adult mean as 1000
[0082]
The concomitant use of calcitonin preparations, active
vitamin D3 preparations, vitamin K preparations, ipriflavone
preparations, bisphosphonate preparations, estrogen
47
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
preparations, protein anabolic hormone preparations, calcium
preparations prescribed by a physician (however, excluding the
above calcium agent administered in a dose of two tablets once
a day), and other drugs that might affect bone metabolism was
prohibited during the administration period. The Lumbar spine
bone mineral density and occurrence of bone fractures were
checked as bone assessments. For the Lumbar spine bone mineral
density, the bone density of the second to fourth lumbar spine
was measured at the start and every six months thereafter
using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). For the
frequency of bone fractures, x-rays were taken from the front
and side of the fourth thoracic to the fifth lumbar spine at
the start and every six months thereafter, and new vertebral
fractures were assessed by comparison of the roentgen films at
the start and at each point in time thereafter using the
method of Genant et al. (Non-patent Reference 14) as a
reference. In locations other than the vertebrae, fractures
were evaluated by checking by roentgen films. Blood samples
were also taken from all patients at the beginning and during
administration, and the general laboratory test values,
including the calcium concentration, were measured. The
administration period in high-risk patients (DXA and new
vertebral fractures were assessed collectively at the center;
fractures of other than vertebrae were assessed by the
investigator based on the roentgen films) was 85.1120.8 weeks
in the 5 unit group and 83.7119.8 weeks in the 100 unit group.
48
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
No significant difference could be found between the two
groups (p < 0.05). The administration period in low-risk
patients was 72.7 19.4 weeks in the 5 unit group and 88.3 21.3
weeks in the 100 unit group. No significant difference could
be found between the two groups (p < 0.05).
[0083]
Tables 4 and 5 show the changes in the vertebral bone
density by group in high-risk patients and low-risk patients.
In the high-risk patients, a significant increase in the bone
density of the 100 unit group was found in comparison to at
the start of administration, and the value was also
significantly higher than that of the 5 unit group (p < 0.05).
On the other hand, no significant differences could be found
in comparison with the start of administration and in
comparison between groups in the low-risk patients (p > 0.05).
[0084] [Table 4]
[Table 4]
Table 4. Lumbar spine bone mineral density situation (.change)
in high-risk patients
Mean standard deviation
Group After 26 W After 52 W After 78 W After 104 W Final check
5 unit
-0.94.4 -0.6f4.1 0.4f4.1 0.4f4.0 -0.1f4.8
group
100 unit
3.3f4.5*# 4.34.5*# 4.0f4.5*# 4.9f4.2*# 4.5f4.6*#
group
* Difference from the start of administration p < 0.05
# Difference from the 5 unit group p < 0.05
49
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0085] [Table 5]
Table 5. Lumbar spine bone mineral density situation (%change)
in low-risk patients
Mean standard deviation
Group After 26 W After 52 W After 78 W Final check
unit group -0.6 6.4 -0.7 6.2 1.9 7.5 -0.6 5.7
100 unit
group$ 3.2 6.1 12.0 12.0
5 $ The bone density was measured in only one patient and the value is shown
as a reference.
[0086]
Table 6 and 7 show the results on the occurrence of new
vertebral fractures by group in high-risk and low-risk
patients. In high-risk patients, the occurrence of fractures
was significantly lower in the 100 unit group than in the
5 unit group (p < 0.05). On the other hand, no significant
difference could be found between groups in the low-risk
patients (p > 0.05).
[0087] [Table 6]
Table 6. Situation of new vertebral fractures in high-risk
patients
No. with
Group fractures No. of vertebral Difference
(persons) fractures between groups
5 unit group 13 22 p < 0.05
100 unit group 3 3
[0088] [Table 7]
Table 7. Situation of new vertebral fractures in low-risk
patients
No. with
Group fractures No. of vertebral Difference
(persons) fractures between groups
5 unit group 1 1
100 unit group 1 2 p > 0.05
[0089]
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Tables 8 and 9 show the results on the occurrence of new
vertebral fractures by group every 26 weeks in high-risk
patients and low-risk patients. In the high-risk patients, the
occurrence of fractures was suppressed from after 26 weeks in
the 100 unit group in comparison to the 5 unit group. On the
other hand, no significant difference could be found between
groups in the low-risk patients.
[0090] [Table 8]
Table 8. Situation of new vertebral fractures every 26 weeks
in high-risk patients
5 unit group 100 unit group
No. No. with Incidence No. of No. No. with Incidence No. of
evaluated fractures (8) fractures evaluated fractures (%) fractures
After 63 6 9.5 8 51 1 2.0 1
26 W
After 63 7 11.1 9 51 1 2.0 1
52 W
After
57 4 7.0 4 45 1 2.2 1
78 W
After
104 W 35 1 2.9 1 25 0 0
After
130 W 10 0 0 5 0 0
[0091] [Table 9]
Table 9. Situation of new vertebral fractures every 26 weeks
in low-risk patients
5 unit group 100 unit group
No. No. with Incidence No. of No. No. with Incidence No. of
evaluated fractures (%) fractures evaluated fractures (%) fractures
After 21 0 -- 0 12 1 8.3 2
26 W
After 21 1 4.8 1 12 0 -- 0
52 W
After 16 0 -- 0 12 0 -- 0
78 W
After 2 0 -- 0 6 0 -- 0
104 W
After
30 W 2 0 0 2 0
130
[0092]
Tables 10 and 11 show the results on the occurrence of
fractures at sites other than the vertebrae by group in high-
risk patients and low-risk patients. In the high-risk
51
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
patients, the occurrence of fractures was significantly lower
in the 100 unit group than in the 5 unit group. On the other
hand, no significant difference could be found between groups
in the low-risk patients.
[0093] [Table 10]
Table 10. Situation of fractures of sites other than the
vertebrae in high-risk patients
Group No. with Site Difference
fractures between groups
(persons)
5 unit group 6 Right clavicle p < 0.05
Proximal phalanx
of the 5th toe of
the right foot
Left 5th rib
Right 10th 11th
ribs
Left pubis
Right 6th rib
100 unit group 1 Neck of proximal
phalanx of the 2nd
toe on the left
[0094] [Table 11]
Table 11. Situation of fractures of sites other than the
vertebrae in low-risk patients
Group No. with Site Difference
fractures between groups
(persons)
5 unit group 1 5t toe of right p > 0.05
foot
100 unit group 0
[0095]
Figure 1 shows the results on the changes in the serum
calcium concentration by group in high-risk patients and low-
risk patients. No hypercalcemia was found in any case, except
for one low-risk patient in the 5 unit group who had a high
52
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
value from before the start of drug administration, in the
results of the laboratory test values obtained using the
sampled blood, and no tendency for the serum calcium to rise
was seen.
[0096]
As we understand from the above tables, subcutaneous
administration of 100 units of teriparatide acetate once a
week significantly increased the bone density of the lumbar
spine and inhibited new vertebral fractures in primary
osteoporosis patients having risk factors for new fractures.
In other words, administration of 100 units of teriparatide
acetate once a week was confirmed to provide a useful
osteoporosis therapeutic agent and agent to inhibit or prevent
bone fractures in the patients of the present invention at
high risk for new fractures.
[0097]
The administration of teriparatide acetate once a week of
the present invention also did not cause hypercalcemia at
either dose during the administration period and appeared to
be more useful than the known daily administration of
teriparatide acetate.
[0098]
(Working Example 2)
The test drug (one vial; injectable freeze-dried
preparation containing 200 units of teriparatide acetate per
vial), prepared by the method of Takai (Patent References 4
53
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
and 5 and Non-patent Reference 11), and control (one vial;
placebo preparation substantially free of teriparatide acetate
per vial) were each dissolved at the time of use in 1 mL of
physiological saline solution and administered intermittently
at a frequency of once a week over a span of 72 weeks to male
and female high-risk patients diagnosed with primary
osteoporosis.
[0099]
The above patients also took two tablets of a calcium
agent once a day after dinner. This calcium preparation was a
soft chewable preparation that contained 610 mg of calcium,
400 IU of vitamin D3, and 30 mg of magnesium in two tablets.
The preparation contained precipitated calcium carbonate,
magnesium carbonate, cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), and the like
as components and is marketed under the trade name "New
Calcichew (trademark) D3" (sold by: Daiichi Sankyo Health Care,
manufactured and sold by: Nitto Pharmaceutical Industries,
Ltd.).
[0100]
Furthermore, the above patients were all outpatients who
were able to walk on their own to whom (1) through (19) below
did not pertain.
(1) Patients diagnosed with secondary osteoporosis due to
a specific cause. Here, specific causes include endocrine
(hyperthyroidism, gonadal failure, Cushing's syndrome),
nutritional (scurvy, other (protein deficiency, vitamin A or D
54
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
excess)), drugs (adrenocortical hormones, methotrexate (MTX),
heparin, aromatase inhibitors, GnRH agonists), immobility
(systemic (bed rest, paraplegia, airplane travel), localized
(after bone fracture and the like)), congenital (osteogenesis
imperfecta, Marfan's syndrome and the like), other (rheumatoid
arthritis, diabetes, liver disease, gastrointestinal disease
(gastric resection) and the like).
(2) Patients having specific diseases other than
osteoporosis that present bone loss. Here, specific diseases
include various osteomalacias, primary, secondary
hyperparathyroidism, bone metastases of malignant tumors,
multiple myeloma, vertebral hemangioma, Pott's disease,
pyogenic spondylitis, and others.
(3) Patients having specific x-ray findings that might
affect the strength of the vertebrae. Here, specific means the
bridging of six or more consecutive vertebrae, severe
ossification of the ligaments surrounding the vertebrae,
severe spinal deformity in the spinal column, and having
undergone surgery on the vertebrae.
(4) Patients who wear a corset that covers all of the
thoracic and lumbar spine.
(5) Patients administered bisphosphonate preparations
within 52 weeks (364 days) of giving consent.
(6) Patients being administered the following
osteoporosis therapeutic agents at the time of consent
(however, these can be selected as subjects if a washout
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
period of 8 weeks (56 days) or longer is possible before
beginning treatment): Calcitonin preparations, active vitamin
D3 preparations, vitamin K preparations, ipriflavone
preparations, estrogen preparations, SERM preparations,
protein anabolic hormone preparations.
(7) Patients with bronchial asthma or a tendency to rash
(erythema, urticaria, and the like), and other such
hypersensitivity symptoms.
(8) Patients with a history of hypersensitivity to PTH
preparations.
(9) Patients with Paget's disease of the bone.
(10) Patients with existing malignant bone tumors or
having had malignant tumors within the past five years.
(11) Patients with multiple myeloma.
(12) Patients with a history of internal or external
radiation therapy of the skeleton.
(13) Patients with a serum calcium value of 11.0 mg/dL or
higher.
(14) Patients with an alkaline phosphatase value two or
more times the upper limit of the standard value.
(15) Patients with serious kidney disease, liver disease,
or heart disease. The criteria for each disease are as
follows:
Kidney disease: Serum creatinine value of 2 mg/dL or
higher
56
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Liver disease: AST (GOT) or ALT (GPT) value of 2.5 times
the upper limit of the standard value or higher or 100 IU/L or
higher
Heart disease: Assessed using grade 2 shown in the
"Severity classification criteria for side effects of
pharmaceutical products (June 29, 1992 Drug Safety
Notification No. 80)" as a reference.
(16) Patients judged to have low reliability in medical
interview (definitely exclude at least patients with
dementia).
(17) Patients who have been administered other test drugs
within 26 weeks (182 days) before consent.
(18) Patients who have been administered PTH preparations
in past trials.
(19) Other patients deemed unsuitable for the trial by
the investigator.
[0101]
Administration of any of the following drugs of (1)
through (6) to the above patients was prohibited from the time
of consent to the trial until the end of the trial.
(1) Osteoporosis therapeutic agents other than
teriparatide acetate (specifically, bisphosphonate
preparations, calcitonin preparations, active vitamin D3
preparations, calcium agents (however, excluding the above
calcium agent taken once a day after dinner), vitamin K
57
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
preparations, ipriflavone preparations, estrogen preparations,
SERM preparations, and anabolic hormone preparations)
(2) Adrenocortical hormone preparations (however, when
the average weekly dose exceeds 5 mg/day, the daily dose
exceeds 10 mg/day, or the total dose exceeds 450 mg,
calculated for prednisolone, administered intramuscularly,
intravenously, or orally)
(3) Aromatase inhibitors
(4) GnRH agonists
(5) Other test drugs
[0102]
The numbers of patients administered the test drug and
control were 290 (also sometimes referred to as the test drug
group in the working example) and 288 (also sometimes referred
to as the control group in the working example), respectively.
The total number administered was 578. However, the number in
each group sometimes differs depending on the type of test and
is expressed, for example, by (n = **) or the number
evaluated, or the like.
[0103]
Bone density, bone geometry, and incidence of bone
fractures were checked as bone assessments.
[0104]
For the bone density of the lumbar spine, the density of
the second to fourth lumbar spine was measured at the start
58
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
and every 24 weeks thereafter using dual-energy x-ray
absorptiometry (DXA).
[0105]
For the bone density of the femur, only the left side of
the proximal part of the femur, rotated 200, was measured at
the start and every 24 weeks thereafter using dual-energy x-
ray absorptiometry (DXA).
[0106]
The DXA geometry was evaluated by the femur bone density
data measured by the investigator at the start and every 24
weeks thereafter.
[0107]
For the CT geometry, the proximal part of the femur was
measured at the start and after 48 and 72 weeks using
multislice CT scan.
[0108]
The incidence of bone fractures was checked by frontal
and lateral x-rays of the fourth thoracic to the fourth lumbar
spine taken at the start and every 24 weeks thereafter. The
roentgen films at the start and at each point in time
thereafter were compared, using the method of Genant et al.
(Non-patent Reference 14) as a reference, and new and
worsening vertebral fractures were evaluated. Locations other
than the vertebrae were evaluated by checking by roentgen film
(DXA, bone geometry, and new and worsening vertebral fractures
were assessed collectively at the center; fractures of other
59
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
than vertebrae were assessed by the investigator based on the
roentgen films).
[0109]
(A) Efficacy of the test drug against multiple vertebral
fractures
Here, "multiple vertebral fractures" was defined as two
or more new vertebral fractures. When the incidence of
multiple vertebral fractures (number of cases) was compared in
the test drug group (n = 261) and control group (n = 281)
after 72 weeks of administration, it was 2.10 (6 cases) in the
control group and 0.8% (2 cases) in the test drug group. In
other word, the test drug demonstrated an inhibitory or
preventative effect against multiple vertebral fractures.
The number of cases with each number of fractures appears
in the table below.
[Table 12]
New vertebral fractures
No. of Test drug group (n = 261) Control group (n = 281)
fractures No. of Incidence No. of Incidence
subjects (o) subjects (o)
None 254 97.3 244 86.8
One 5 1.9 31 11
Two 2 0.8 4 1.4
Three 0 0.0 1 0.4
Four 0 0.0 1 0.4
Five or more 0 0.0 0 0.0
[0110]
(B) Efficacy of the test drug in primary osteoporosis
patients taking glucocorticoid
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The effect of administration of the test drug to primary
osteoporosis patients taking glucocorticoid was studied. The
results were as in the table below. The test drug was shown to
be effective in primary osteoporosis patients taking
glucocorticoid.
61
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
0 co
N M O
N
m
M co
0 00 M O
w 1
rI
-rI 3 l0 \0
k co
N N O
P4
0 0
o O
0 0 0
3 d~ `r
d N
o\o I N H
= dl N r-I
M O
0
44 N M M
4-J
0
m
m in 0
0 c\
-r-I Z N N N
0 0 0 N
C C
0 0 1J
N
3 O o rd U
0 0 0
va w
(d U)
N
N M
00 N
N JJ
0
O M
4
0 U
0 3 m m
44
00 Ln H 44
0
0
U 0
0 ~0 N
to N 4J =H
N 4J
a N M 0 14 M
W U
-H
0 0 Q
0 0
M o 0 0
04
04 u
-
O Ra
A O O
rUl ~I N II N bl 0
1 bl ` 0 1 bl
~-I 4J 1J C
0 44 M ~I -- a) 0 ~I r-I
0 m C P, -i O H O
0
U Q) =H 4J i 4J II +0 JJ
-rHl rd
H 0 co O C r-+ H 0 0
bi H rd H b) H O ~- N H O
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0112]
Since glucocorticoid are drugs that cause secondary
osteoporosis, the above results suggest that the test drug may
be effective against secondary osteoporosis caused by drugs
that trigger secondary osteoporosis such as glucocorticoid.
[0113]
(C) Efficacy of the test drug on three parts of the femur
The effects of the test drug on three parts of the femur
(neck of the femur, trochanter, and shaft of the femur) were
studied using ordinary CT scans. The results were as in the
table below. The test drug was shown to be effective on each
part of the femur.
63
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 15]
(C-l)Effect on the neck of the femur
Neck of (At start Cfrome p value Change p value
N-48 W Baseline baseline (between from
baseline (between
femur 472 W) after 48 groups (* after 72 groups (*
P < 0.05)
(o) p < 0.05) weeks 01)
weeks wVolume Test drug
bone group (n = 221.38 0.92 0.1155 0.15 0.1658
mineral 30428->22)
density Control
(total) group (n = 227.98 -0.72 -1.23
[vBMD 37->33-30)
total]
Volume Test drug
bone group (n = 665.02 -0.77 0.5638 -1.14 0.6852
mineral 30-->28422)
density
(cortical Control
bone) group (n = 676.84 -0.22 -0.82
[vBMD 37-->33-->30)
cortical]
Test drug
group (n = 14.01 -3.48 *0.0084 -3.40 *0.012
Buckling 30-28-22)
ratio Control
group (n = 13.44 1.27 1.85
37-X33-30)
Test drug
Maximum group (n = 0.3851 3.43 0.0819 1.87 0.5837
section 30->28- 22)
modulus Control
(Z group (n = 0.3793 -0.27 0.62
min)) 37- 33430)
64
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 161
(C-2) Effect on the trochanter
Change p value Change p value
(At start from (between from (between
Trochanter --)48 W Baseline basafteerli48ne groups baseline
72ine groups
472 W) weeks (* P < weeks (* P <
) 0.05) (o) 0.05)
( o
Volume Test drug
bone group (n = 186.45 1.36 *0.0086 0.95 0.0802
mineral 30- 28422)
density Control
(total)
[vBMD group (n = 196.10 -1.50 -1.47
total] 36432->30)
Volume Test drug
bone group (n = 638.98 -0.49 0.8300 -1.49 0.1653
mineral 30- 28-22)
density
(cortical Control
bone) group (n = 646.03 -0.34 -0.61
[vBMD 36-32-30)
cortical]
Test drug
group (n = 19.64 1.59 0.3015 1.27 0.7681
Buckling 30-*28-22)
ratio Control
group (n = 19.26 4.26 2.13
36->32->30)
Test drug
Maximum group (n = 0.6989 5.19 0.4324 3.20 0.6567
section 30--)28422)
modulus
(SM (Z Control
min group (n = 0.7295 2.38 1.81
36-32-30)
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 17]
(C-3) Effect on the shaft of the femur
Change Change
(At start from p value from p value
Shaft of (between (between
-->48 W Baseline baseline baseline
femur 72 W) after 48 p groups (* after 72 groups (*
weeks (o) < 0. 05) weeks (o) P < 0.05)
Volume Test drug
bone group (n = 463.59 1.03 0.3521 1.25 0.0613
mineral 29-28- 21)
density Control
(total) group (n = 482.05 -0.22 -1.43
[vBMD 37- 33430)
total]
Volume Test drug
bone group (n = 880.91 0.59 0.7796 0.18 0.2703
mineral 29-28-21)
density
(cortical Control
bone) group (n = 892.97 0.33 -0.87
[vBMD 37- 33->30)
cortical]
Test drug
group (n = 3.64 -0.66 0.3977 -3.54 *0.0008
Buckling 29428421)
ratio Control
group (n = 3.39 0.92 1.91
37-X33-30)
Test drug
Maximum group (n = 0.9015 1.28 0.1499 2.69 0.1604
section 29428421)
modulus Control
(SM (Z group (n = 0.9343 -0.78 0.32
min ) ) 37433--30)
[0114]
(D) Study of prescriptions for nausea and vomiting
associated with administration of the test drug
The administration period and efficacy of various drugs
to treat nausea and vomiting associated with administration of
the test drug were studied.
66
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 18]
Treated
Before or
Event (total Name of drug used in after Effective or
no. of treatment test drug ineffective
subjects)
Gaster D Unknown Effective
Gaster D, Nauzelin Unknown Effective
Unknown (some days
Nauzelin Before effective, some
days not)
Novamine Before Ineffective
Primperan tablet Before Ineffective
Primperan Before Ineffective
Primperan Before Some effect
Nauzelin (taken after
breakfast, lunch, and Before Effective
dinner)
Nausea 20 Takepron OD tablet After Ineffective
Gaster D tablet After Ineffective
Gasmotin tablet After Effective
Nauzelin After Effective
Primperan After Some effect
Primperan After Effective
Primperan tablet After Effective
Takepron OD After Effective
Primperan tablet, After Effective
primperan injection
Primperan, Takepron OD After Effective
Caster D20, Nauzelin After Effective
Rokushingan After Effective
Nauzelin (taken after
Vomiting breakfast, lunch, and Before Effective
dinner)
[0115]
As shown above, primperan, Nauzelin, Gaster D, Gasmotin,
Takepron OD, and rokushingan were effective. Nauzelin,
Gasmotin, and rokushingan were especially preferred.
[0116]
(E) Evaluation of the effects of the types and existence
of complications on the effects of the test drug
Some of the above patients had complications. The effects
of the type (diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia) and
existence of complications on the effects of the test drug
67
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
were therefore evaluated. The results were as in the table
below. The test drug was clarified to inhibit the development
of new vertebral fractures from after 24 weeks of
administration regardless of the type or existence of
complications.
[Table 19]
Incidence of new
vertebrae fractures
.H ( o )
4j Q)
After After After
0 U 24 W 48 W 72 W
z
w
0
z 0
z
Complication No Test 243 54 7 2.8 3.3 3.3
(diabetes) drug
Control 257 29 35 5.8 11.0 15.0
Yes Test
drug 18 4 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Control 24 2 2 0.0 4.3 8.9
Complication No Test
(hypertension) drug 117 29 3 2.1 3.1 3.1
Control 150 16 26 6.3 13.0 19.0
Yes Test
drug 144 29 4 3.1 3.1 3.1
Control 131 15 11 4.0 7.5 9.2
Complication No Test
(hyperlipidemia) drug 156 34 4 2.2 3.0 3.0
Control 169 17 26 5.6 10.2 16.8
Yes Test
drug 105 24 3 3.2 3.2 3.2
Control 112 14 11 4.8 10.9 10.9
[0117]
Diabetic osteoporosis in which diabetes as the underlying
10 disease is one form of secondary osteoporosis, but the fact
that the test drug was found to have an effect in primary
osteoporosis patients having diabetes as a complication
suggests the possibility that the test drug will also have a
therapeutic effect in diabetic osteoporosis.
[0118]
68
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
(F) Efficacy of the test drug on worsening bone fractures
The efficacy of the test drug on worsening bone fractures
was studied. The results were as in the table below. The test
drug was shown to be effective on worsening bone fractures.
[Table 20]
Difference between
v 10 Incidence of worsening test drug group and
rA fractures (o) control group after 72
~+ W M. ) log
FAS Z p S 90& rank
U o confidence test
After After After Dif-
o H Z w 24 W 48 W 72 W ference interval
z Lower upper
limit limit
Test
drug 261 60 1 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.8 0.2 3.5 0.0860
group
Control 281 37 6 2.3 2.3 2.3
group
[0119]
(G) Evaluation of the effect of a history of taking other
osteoporosis therapeutic agents on the efficacy of the test
drug
As was stated above, the above patients were prohibited
as a general rule from being administered any osteoporosis
therapeutic agents other than teriparatide acetate from the
time of consenting to the trial until the end of the trial.
However, there were also patients who took other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents under specific conditions before consenting
to the trial. The effects of a history of taking other
osteoporosis therapeutic agents on the efficacy of the test
drug were therefore evaluated from the viewpoints of the
69
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
incidence of new vertebral fractures and the percentage change
in bone density.
[0120]
The table below shows the results obtained by evaluating
the incidence of new vertebral fractures. In the table, the
incidence of fractures was 2.9% in the test drug group and
16.1% in the control group after 72 weeks of administration in
patients with a history of taking other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents. The incidence of bone fractures was 3.2%
in the test drug group and 12.9% in the control group in
patients with no such history. In other words, the test drug
was clarified to have higher efficacy in patients with a
history of taking other osteoporosis therapeutic agents than
in those with no such history.
[Table 21]
Incidence of new
No. No. No. with vertebral fractures (o)
evaluated discontinued fractures After After After
24 W----48 W 72 W
Prior Test
osteoporosis drug 139 31 4 2.4 3.2 3.2
treatment
(no) group
Control
142 13 17 6.7 9.8 12.9
group
Prior
osteoporosis Test
drug 122 27 3 2.9 2.9 2.9
treatment
(yes) group
Control 139 18 20 3.8 11.2 16.1
group
[0121]
The table below shows the results obtained by evaluating
the percentage change in bone density. In the table, the
increase in Lumbar spine bone mineral density after 48 weeks
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
of administration of the test drug was remarkable even in
patients with a history of taking other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents. In particular, a remarkable increase in
Lumbar spine bone mineral density was seen as early as after
24 weeks of administration in the test drug group when the
other osteoporosis therapeutic agents were calcium L-
aspartate, elcatonin, Alfacalcidol, menatetrenone, and
calcitriol. It is particularly noteworthy that remarkable
increases in the bone density of the neck of the femur and
proximal femur were seen after 72 weeks of administration of
the test drug when the other osteoporosis therapeutic agents
were calcium L-aspartate and elcatonin. When the other
osteoporosis therapeutic agent was elcatonin in particular, it
deserves special mention that a vast increase was seen in the
bone density of the proximal femur as early as after 24 weeks
of administration of the test drug.
[Table 22]
Percentage change in bone density (5)
Calcium L- Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
aspartate
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200
group (n = 0.00 3.78 6.16 5.85 0.00 1.44 1.88 4.17 0.00 1.76 2.28 3.69
17, 23, 23)
P group (n
= 20, 24, 0.00 -0.31 -1.01 -1.52 0.00 0.57 0.83 1.61 0.00 0.71 -0.18 -0.17
24)
Alfacalcidol Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W---48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200 group
(n = 41, 51, 0.00 3.11 5.47 6.47 0.00 1.64 0.85 2.19 0.00 2.77 2.31 2.31
51)
P group (n =
37, 46, 45) 0.00 -0.65 -1.01 -0.69 0.00 -0.28 -0.16 -0.96 0.00 0.11 -0.89 -
1.05
71
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
Raloxifene
hydrochloride Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200 group
(n = 18, 21, 0.00 1.77 4.96 4.59 0.00 0.21 1.03 -0.51 0.00 2.44 2.26 3.03
21
P group (n =
22, 24, 24) 0.00 -0.33 -1.74 -1.89 0.00 -0.61 -0.61 0.58 0.00 0.04 0.45 0.62
Elcatonin Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200
group (n = 0.00 3.95 3.59 5.36 0.00 1.62 0.72 3.15 0.00 3.86 3.44 4.41
22, 28, 28)
P group (n
= 20, 26, 0.00 -0.29 0.20 0.95 0.00 -1.35 0.95 0.29 0.00 -0.73 -0.95 0.10
26)
Percentage change in bone density (9)
Menatetrenone Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200 group (n
= 5,5,5) 0.00 2.70 3.04 4.32 0.00 0.72 -3.18 -0.78 0.00 0.60 0.56 -1.40
P group (n =
4,6,6) 0.00 -1.03 2.47 -1.53 0.00 -1.16 1.03 -4.70 0.00 -0.34 -2.43 3.78
Calcium Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
lactate
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200
group (n = 0.00 1.96 3.45 4.93 0.00 0.30 -4.35 -2.53 0.00 1.78 -1.68 -3.20
7, 5, 5)
P group (n
= 6, 9, 9) 0.00 -0.88 -0.17 0.43 0.00 -2.19 0.83 -3.00 0.00 0.39 1.15 -1.58
Calcitriol Lumbar spine Neck of femur Proximal femur
Week 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W 0 W 24 W 48 W 72 W
PTH200
group (n = 0.00 3.50 4.40 6.38 0.00 0.60 4.03 3.53 0.00
5, 6, 6) 1.40 1.05 0.04
P group (n
= 11, 13, 0.00 0.70 0.49 0.72 0.00 1.26 1.25 3.81 0.00 0.55 0.01 0.43
13)
[0122]
The effects of a history of taking other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents on the efficacy of the test drug were also
evaluated in detail from the standpoint of the incidence of
new vertebral fractures for each of the other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents. The results are shown in the table below.
As is understood from the table, remarkable inhibition of new
72
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
fractures due to administration of the test drug was seen in
patients with a history of taking other osteoporosis
therapeutic agents other than calcitriol.
[Table 23]
Calcium L- New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
aspartate Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 9 1 28 38
Control group 2 5 27 34
Alfacalcidol New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 16 1 62 79
Control group 12 11 50 73
Raloxifene New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
hydrochloride Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 9 0 20 29
Control group 8 5 24 37
Elcatonin New vertebral fractures: yes or no
Total
Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 10 2 35 47
Control group 9 5 34 48
Menatetrenone New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 1 0 6 7
Control group 3 3 4 10
Calcium lactate New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 1 0 8 9
Control group 1 2 7 10
Calcitriol New vertebral fractures: yes or no Total
Discontinued Yes No
Test drug group 2 1 7 10
Control group 1 2 13 16
[01231
(H) Efficacy and safety of the test drug for osteoporosis
patients having renal dysfunction
73
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The efficacy and safety of the test drug were studied in
a group of osteoporosis patients having normal renal function,
a group of osteoporosis patients having mild renal
dysfunction, and a group of osteoporosis patients having
moderate renal dysfunction.
[0124]
(H-1) Distribution of background factors of each group
(details)
The group of osteoporosis patients having normal renal
function was listed as "normal (>80)," the group of
osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction as "mild
impairment (>50 to <80)," and the group of osteoporosis
patients having moderate renal dysfunction as "moderate
impairment (<50)." The test drug group was listed as the
"PTH200 group" and the control group as the "P group." The
group of osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction
and group of osteoporosis patients having moderate renal
dysfunction are also sometimes listed together as "abnormal
(<80)." Each patient was classified into the above groups
based on their creatinine clearance. Specifically, creatinine
clearance of 80 mL/min or higher was regarded as normal renal
function, from 50 to less than 80 mL/min as mild renal
dysfunction, and from 30 to less than 50 mL/min as moderate
renal dysfunction.
[0125]
(H-i) Distribution of background factors of each group
74
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
The distribution of background factors of each group was
as follows.
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
a)
Ln Ln
Ln rl Ln N
rd N N
rd O N to lD 0 O Ln N 0 N Ln
N 00 H H N N M M M
S~ U 0 0
id Ln N 0 0 0 O
-H O 0 M Ln El- 00 C) 0 0 0
) rd
a) > O 0 Ln Ln N LD Ln m O H f-i
l~ N ri H Ln Ln N N H (N
a)
j Ln O
n Ln Ln h
U -rl > n Ln lzv N H O N ,-i O H H
l0 lD rl r1 d~ N ri H H
N
O
ro -H
'b 4-L
("' -(b
Ln 1D N M N L-
(0 > OD m lD V' d~ N N Ln 00 0 N 00
U) (n M Ln Ln N N M 14 LD H 0
a)
CV) Q)
(L1 Ln li H H N N
H N 00 L() Lo N N lfl O r -
Q) it 0 H
> > 0 0 Ln Ln N L` Ln Ln m O N H
FC N N H H Ln Ln N N H N
N
O ~
Z (d m m m m m m m m m m m m
U VL dL W dL dL dL d~ dL d~ d~ d" V~
0 0 0 0 0 C)
0 0 0 0 O O
N N N N N
O
x x x x x
S
a a a a PHi a a a a a a a
a) ~,
Ti) bl N J-i N 41
4J U) U U a) U) r
a) -~ - - 4-J rl rd a) Q)
4-4 Ul
N N 41 4 x rd Ln H O rEi
4 Q4 ~A rd Q) 41 r-i
N 0) 0 H a) 0 (0 N U 0
P: rA b7 U) -H a) Pi ~4 >- S4 a) l-
a) G r,
x S al H E- a> w
4-1
it
rd r-A
(a
u o
u 00
0 Al
z--
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
O U
o d E O
X rd
Ln d N r-{ d N Uo N Ln O UO l0 ra >
00 m m 0) m m OD 0) r-i H
LI) C
rn rd
O O d' M O UD O 0 O b
H H 0) O dl M Uo o 't lzv d~ U >
UO N N N N CC) N N rl ri
0 a)
N Ln E C
H C) N co H N Ln Ln I)) m -H >
O O Ln Ln Ln d' Ln Ln ) UO H H
N
'd rl
ra
rd 4j
r4 rd
I
O N k.0 H H
0) c o M
M r >
r-i o o 0) OD m H 0) TI, I:v Ln Ln U)
U
0) U
m lD M l0 d Ln M U) ~4
W
co O M N Ln m d~ d1 d~ V~ > >
r1 ri U0 N N N N N N N r-I H ~i
m
U
O H O H O 44 U)
m m m o N N N Uo UD Ln w Ln Z O rt
TT M (q M M M M ri H H H U
0 0 0 o O o 04
0 0 0 o O C
x x x x x x 0
H H H H H H
a a a a a a a a w a a
o )U-4 O -~ 3~-L O 0 3U-i O
-rl a) r-I O -ri c\o O ri 0 -H o\o E 0 -H \o U
C rd 44 aJ ~- E it w 4J -' U w JJ - _ U)
rd -r ~4 U rd a) 4 U rd v-, U a) (d E
-1 ri (n 0 a) A u d44 a) A ~d C A ~+ d 11 m
U
O rd a) 41 m C 4-) U C .U U r-f O 1J U -- U -H
Q) )4 ~r m -H >v m 4J 4-i -H >r U) )i it Q r-i >v m JJ 41 m
ri U) -rl S4 E aJ -ri l-I 0 5 4J -H S4 E rd U -H I-I J-) rd
ra a) lJ C ra -H C a) -rf r. (D -H H Sa -r1 C U U) -A
> _0 U O -H Q v m m -H > X rd v m -H > is a
it w E o E rl r U of 0 u A G E G a) -H C
S4 U U 'd C O 0 U 'd >4 0 (D 0 U 'd >4 0 )-L 0 -rl U d >+ 0 0) U
a> w Q ra A CJ a U z S2 co - U a u E 'd ra U x
iJ
C
i
E cc) rd
v
-H I }a
n 1J
o
Yd Ln u m
e Al
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
O O M ri
O~ l0 ri O 01 f+') In in co in of 00 in H
lD l0 in M in 01 m m 01
O O O O
dr in (N CO O C) in O O O N in O H
. . . .
O in in N dr in ri N H ri L~ L N in
in dr N N N N LD L9 LD l0
N N Ol c
N a' in in H N H H O O H N LD co
in in li H ri ri in d' Vr in
OD
N
0 in In N
li in Co 00 lD l0 ri N d' rl d' d' N O
. . .
lfl in N N Ln in r-I ri ri r-I Ol ri co O.
H ri
M lfl 0\
Ln N N CO m N m O co N N in 10
.
O Ql in N d' Ln ri N H ri 00 N. L in
in N N N N l0 in in in
O H O H O li O H O ri Izv
to in in in in in in in in in m
H H H H H H H H H H in m co 0 0)
O C) O O O O O
O O O O O O C)
H H H H H H H
P4 04 LL W LL CL C4 0) 04 Q, 04 04 a 04
o 0 -- p o
m 41 r~ (Z 44 4-) 5 M 44 -0
bl Sa 11 M -rl ~l a) td v 4) a) rd
NE v a) r i U) O 4 1 H m ~4 04 41 m O rd a) v F~ m a) 41 0) 0 tea) C aI) .0 41
bl w - v E a) f4 u) r >. u) v-i -ri w 4J
41 rd r d m r-i Q H H ,q v -H ~ 4 E it -H 0 E)J -H
P, ~r ro v i-i rA M U) JJ k r -- ro -rl O (D -rl O U)
to U) 0 ra > 1-i U 0 = > 4J U 0 =rr ,q v m -ri (D rn -H
l H O C U) v ~-+ I ~4 0 O 4rt w E 0 E O O E O U O O E O
a) -H a) >. a) S4 0 C a) (D d f~ 0 a) rd >+ 0 0) 0 a) 'd >r 0
3 m HEv a>wa) -- a>wAro aQ zsrd -- UZQIdrd -- U
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
O 0 Ln 0 Ln I
-H r
(N H M Lf) 00 LM fl O N 0) N LO rd 00
0 m rn m H H l0 w N M d' >
O 0 L() Ln O O
Ln N O 0 O Ln LU N M d O rd O
O O O ri M M H H O 'd 'H r-I
N N CO OD d1 N N M 0) y M
E
M O 0 n N
N Ln Lf) N M O ri l0 N C rd N
LD LO H H M M r1 r1 H -,-1 > H
0
N rN Ln d' m H -O
M N Ln Ln Ln H l0 N N N I- 4J
H H Ln Ln w LD l0 LU M M l0
> :>
H rl to
m m 00 m co N N Lf) M H Ln N Ln O
M (D
N dl O O M d~ d~ H H ri r~
L~ l0 CO M N N M a) (d O
> M
M Lf) co CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00 N Lo
0 01 l0 N l0 N 10 L- w I- w 0 W N
H co
0 d N
U
O O O 0 O O
O O O O O O
(N C14 cq
a a a a a a a 04 Poi a w 0
w
~4 a) q
s4 o \0
Q) 44 o u H
r1 0 4) v - x U U) H
rd A H >, m u bi w - rt
E fd 1J -H IH (0 rd N r' 11
=H ri ?a -H O a) X , O H rd a)
X rt a) to - l b) 0 0) 0 rd u)
0 11 Ci C.' 5 4 i N -rl -ri H E 0 a) >
~4 O -H (D 'd >1 O d1 0) a) -ri a) >
Q4 u E 'd rd - u rC x 3 W E E- v
-) m
0-H -~ Id
a) rd o
0 E v
~ -H U
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
In In W In N N H CO O r)
O O m CO CO m
H H
O O O In M CO O r=i m co
(N N N li dr N N r) N L.O
CO N CO CO CO CO
H H O O ri H CO N r+1 M
CO In (n dr CO dr
O
OD
M rn Ln CO Ln CO r1 V' N h
H H H H CO H N O CO N
M r1 CO co CO H CO U) CO CO
N N N H Ln H N CO Ln r
CO N CO CO CO CO
CO CO CO co O m O CO O (0
CO L- CO l- rn CO
Vr d~ ~i' dr
O O O O O
O O O CD
O
H H H H H
QI QI PI QI P( P4 P4 04 04 w
0 0 - p4 0 0
J-1 -ri v ri 0 -H o\0 0 r-I 0 -ri o\o 0 Ul -ri o\o
ti 4-) C M 44 J -- a) w 4J -- v C
(0 -H t v (Q v S4 v rd -- 4-4 v v d
1J ri U) C 1) H U) rk4 a v Q ~4 rd 4a v .o rd C rd
C(avv 0()v )J U) C 4- v 4J vH0 4--1 v
S4 Q r Q ~-i U) -H >- U) .0 44 -r1 >v W 1i (tO ,Q r-i U) 41
r-I ,Q C r-I r1 A 0 v -H 4 0 -H 4 0 0 4J -H ~I 0 rd v -ri 04
v r1 v C ro i C v C v -ri r1 04 04 C v
0 04 t O 0 0 M w E 0 C C F rl u rl 0 E G 0 4.J - r, 44 E r
0-I v 04 0 C ~i 0 N v rL3 C C 0 0 rd >+ 0 v 0 v rd >+ 0 0 ri v rd >( 0
C4 > 44 v QI > 4- Q it -- a Q rd (IS -- 0 Z Q rd M -- U 04 4i 0 Q rd -- 0
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0126]
(H-2) Efficacy of the test drug in each group (inhibition
of bone fractures)
The test drug was clarified to have an inhibitory effect
on new vertebral fractures in the group of osteoporosis
patients having normal renal function and the groups of
osteoporosis patients having renal dysfunction (mild and
moderate).
[Table 25]
Incidence of new
No. No. No. with vertebral fractures (%)
evaluated discontinued fractures After After After
24 W 48 W 72 W
Creatinine Normal PTH200 46 9 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
clearance (>80) P 48 5 4 2.2 4.4 9.1
value at Abnormal PTH200 202 47 6 2.8 3.4 3.4
start (<80) P 223 25 31 6.2 12.2 15.3
[0127]
(H-3) Efficacy of the test drug in each group (increased
bone density)
The test drug was clarified to have the effect of
increasing the lumbar vertebral density in the group of
osteoporosis patients having normal renal function, group of
osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction, and group
of osteoporosis patients having moderate renal dysfunction.
[Table 26]
Change in PTH200 group P group
lumbar
vertebral No. No.
density (%) of Mean SD Min Median Max of Mean SD Min Median Max
cases cases
Normal After 28 4.3 4.7 5.1 13.7 36 1.2 3.2 -5.3 1.0 8.9
(>80) 24 W 5.0
81
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
After -
48 W 25 5.4 3.7 1 1 5.6 11.9 30 1.4 3.4 -4.7 0.8 6.7
After -
72 W 24 8.1 5.3 1.0 B.0 20.2 29 1.9 4.8 -4.9 0.8 12.6
Final 29 7.5 5.4 1 0 5.6 20.2 36 1.4 4.6 -4.9 0.8 12.6
After -
aJ 24 W 66 3.9 3.8 4.7 3.7 15.4 73 0.3 2.9 -6.6 0.6 6.8
rE o After -
0 48 W 60 6.0 4.9 7 0 5.7 18.0 72 0.1 3.5 -8.7 0.7 7.2
M V
QI 1
E Ln After - -
ro ni 72 W 56 6.3 5.3 4.6 6.6 18.3 67 -0.4 4.3 10.2 -0.9 9.3
Final 74 5.8 5.0 4 6 5.4 18.3 79 -0.2 4.1 10.2 -0.5 9.3
4J After -
24 W 24 3.7 5.8 8 5 3.5 15.4 33 0.4 3.5 -5.6 0.7 7.5
E
.I After -
(d 22 4.9 4.4 3.8 14.1 31 0.7 4.2 -8.8 0.7 9.2
E 48 W 4.5
-H Ln
a After -
a 72 W 21 6.1 5.0 1 3 6.3 21.5 30 0.2 4.4 -9.1 0.5 8.0
av
Final 27 5.6 5.3 2 4 4.9 21.5 36 0.0 4.1 -9.1 0.1 8.0
[0128]
(H-4) Safety of the test drug in each group (corrected
serum calcium)
No significant differences could be found between any
group administered the test drug and the control group as a
result of administering the test drug to a group of
osteoporosis patients having normal renal function, a group of
osteoporosis patients having mild renal dysfunction, and a
group of osteoporosis patients having moderate renal
dysfunction. More specifically, the test drug was clarified to
have equivalent safety in terms of the serum calcium in all
groups.
82
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 27]
Corrected PTH200 group P group
serum
calcium No. No.
(mg/dL) of Mean SD Min Median Max of Mean SD Min Median Max
cases cases
At 49 9.5 0.3 8.8 9.5 10.6 49 9.5 0.4 8.9 9.5 10.4
start
After 49 9.5 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.6 48 9.6 0.3 8.9 9.6 10.5
4 W
After
45 9.6 0.4 8.6 9.5 10.5 48 9.5 0.3 8.6 9.5 10.3
0 12 W
CO
nl
After 43 9.5 0.4 8.9 9.5 10.7 48 9.5 0.4 8.9 9.5 10.9
8 24 W
E
is
z After
48 W 39 9.3 0.3 8.8 9.2 10.0 44 9.4 0.3 8.8 9.4 10.3
After 37 9.4 0.3 8.9 9.3 10.1 43 9.3 0.3 8.6 9.3 10.2
72 W
Final 49 9.4 0.3 8.9 9.4 10.4 48 9.3 0.3 8.6 9.3 10.2
At 160 9.5 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.9 151 9.5 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.8
start
After
4 W 155 9.5 0.4 8.6 9.5 11.6 151 9.6 0.4 8.8 9.6 11.7
m
v
o After
Al 12 W 137 9.6 0.3 8.8 9.5 10.5 149 9.5 0.4 8.7 9.5 12.1
u
a) After 121 9.5 0.4 8.7 9.5 10.7 143 9.5 0.3 8.7 9.4 11.6
E 24 W
0. After
48 W 112 9.3 0.3 8.5 9.3 10.8 135 9.3 0.3 8.7 9.3 10.2
. After
72 W 107 9.3 0.3 8.5 9.3 10.7 128 9.3 0.3 8.7 9.3 10.2
Final 157 9.4 0.3 8.5 9.4 10.7 151 9.4 0.3 8.5 9.3 10.9
At 68 9.6 0.4 8.6 9.5 10.6 78 9.6 0.4 8.9 9.5 10.8
start
After
0 4 W 66 9.5 0.3 9.0 9.5 10.8 78 9.6 0.4 8.5 9.6 10.7
Ln
v
After
12 W 62 9.5 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.4 75 9.6 0.4 8.9 9.6 10.7
v
E e
Q4 24tWr 59 9.5 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.5 71 9.6 0.4 8.8 9.5 10.5
E
-H
4fter 51 9.3 0.3 8.7 9.3 10.2 67 9.4 0.4 8.7 9.4 10.5
v
o After
72 W 45 9.4 0.3 8.8 9.4 10.2 63 9.4 0.4 8.7 9.3 10.3
Final 67 9.4 0.4 8.7 9.4 10.4 78 9.4 0.4 8.5 9.3 10.4
83
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0129]
(H-5) Safety of the test drug in each group (incidence of
adverse events)
The incidence of adverse events was studied after
administering the test drug to the a group of osteoporosis
patients having normal renal function, a group of osteoporosis
patients having mild renal dysfunction, and a group of
osteoporosis patients having moderate renal dysfunction.
[Table 28]
Adverse events 950
confidence
95% interval of
confidence the
interval of exact Fisher's
Point difference
Normal Yes No each group test estimate (asymptote)
(>80) Total (exact) p of the (with
value
difference continuity
(2-way) correction)
No. No. Lower Upper Lower Upper
of (%) of M limit limit limit limit
cases cases
PTH2O0
46 93.9 3 6.1 49 83.1 98.7 1.0000 2.0 -10.2 14.3
group
P
45 91.8 4 8.2 49 80.4 97.7
group
[Table 29]
Adverse events 95 96
confidence
956 interval of
confidence the
interval of Fisher's
Mild Yes No exact Point difference
impairment Total each group test p estimate (asymptote)
(exact) of the (with
(>50 <80) value difference continuity
(2 way) correction)
No. No. Lower Upper Lower Upper
of ( 96) of ('_) limit limit limit limit
cases cases
PTH200
147 91.9 13 8.1 160 86.5 95.6 0.6689 -1.5 -7.9 4.9
group
P
141 93.4 10 6.6 151 88.2 96.8
group
84
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 3 01
Adverse events 95%
confidence
95% interval of
confidence the
interval of Fisher's Point difference
Moderate Yes No each group exact estimate (asymptote)
impairment Total (exact) test p (<50) exact) value of the (with
(2 way) difference continuity
correction)
No. No.
of Lower Upper Lower Upper
of ( s) of (~) limit limit limit limit
cases cases
PTH200
65 95.6 2 4.4 68 87.6 99.1 0.3385 4.6 -4.8 13.9
group
P
group 71 91.0 7 9.0 78 82.4 96.3
[0130]
(H-6) Safety of the test drug in each group (incidence of
side effects)
The incidence by the test drug in each group was about
twice that of the control as a result of administering the
test drug to the a group of osteoporosis patients having
normal renal function, a group of osteoporosis patients having
mild renal dysfunction, and a group of osteoporosis patients
having moderate renal dysfunction. In other words, the safety
of the test drug as regards side effects was clarified to be
equivalent in all groups.
[Table 31]
Side effects 95%
confidence
95% interval of
confidence the
Fisher's
interval of exact Point difference
Normal Yes No Total each group test p estimate (asymptote)
(>80) (exact) value of the (with
(2 way) difference continuity
correction)
No. No. Lower Upper Lower Upper
of ( s) of (6) limit limit limit limit
cases cases
PTH2O0 22 44.9 27 55.1 49 30.7 59.8 0.0318 22.4 2.2 42.7
group
P
11 22.4 38 77.6 49 11.8 36.6
group
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[Table 32]
Side effects 95% confidence
95% confidence interval of
interval of Fisher's point the difference
Mild exact
impairment Yes No Total each group test estimate of (asymptote)
(exact) p the (with
(?50-<80) value (2- difference continuity
way) correction)
No. of No. of Lower Upper Lower Upper
cases I ( ) cases ( ) limit limit limit limit
PTH200
72 45.0 88 55.0 160 37.1 22.7 <.00001 29.1 18.8 39.4
group
P
24 15.9 127 84.1 151 10.5 53.1
group
[Table 33]
Side effects 95% confidence
95% confidence interval of
interval of Fisher's Point the difference
Moderate exact (asymptote)
impairment Yes No Total e(exact) group test p estimate of (with the (<50)
exact) value (2- difference continuity
way) correction)
No. of No. of Lower Upper Lower Upper
cases (`) cases (") limit limit limit limit
PTH200
25 36.8 43 63.2 68 25.4 49.3 0.0251 17.5 1.7 33.3
group
P
15 19.2 63 80.8 78 11.2 29.7
group
[0131]
(I) Effects of test drug administration on changes over
time in the incidence of new vertebral fractures
The test drug group was listed as the "PTH200 group" and
the control group as the "P group."
86
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
m
w a)
0
0 u
0 a z u
It
v 44 H _i _j
u
0 Od
r
a) N
U a)
(D ~4 41 O N
0 -H Ul ;J
0 r N
N a) .-1 04 H U
41 `~ ; `a ri 04 U (d O H M
y
a w w 34 0 H w M lf1 lfl
rl (U
0 4-1
-i ?a a1 M bl
0
N 0 -rl a) -rl r 04 N
3 p a~ 3 6 ,4 a)
~Ne1" 00-~ u
w 'ro
0
Z w H ~A
N
w CL
w N " 1- b
44
Q O
44
4-) 00
Ca m z7~
04 d H r U1
ri 111 w N Co In d,
oW N 3 M C~ ri N N N
ro
4-4 rl
r v
O
0)
U yi H <r . 0 U
u M H rd
3 z
u
w 4 z w r N 0
~
-H ro w
u olo
to M
a
H L) U 3 N Ln U 0)
0) N a 41
0 -H U
0 U ro M T
0 0 04 . .
U H w N 0 0
y H o
7
N
r r N
U M E al
N
zw õ
u
ro
a) Z w N O
-~
0 0
z 0 co ri = b
u ul m 0 0
N zH
H
ro4MW
>w1-,o
N N N
a)
fi 0
ro 000 rlH Ln ~ zs
N N 41 fd cr r
w ~4
U U) N N
0 VI VI
A A p
H -4
H w N E E N N d
x H
P4 V
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
[0132]
As shown in the above tables, the incidence of new
vertebral fractures every six months was basically steady at
approximately 5% in all divisions of the P group. In contrast
to this, the incidence of each division dropped as the
administration period lengthened in the PTH200 group, and no
new vertebral fractures occurred after 48 weeks. The incidence
of new vertebral fractures was also lower than that of the P
group in all divisions consisting of within 24 weeks, 24 to
48 weeks, and 48 to 72 weeks, and the relative risk reduction
(RRR) in comparison to the placebo increased as administration
continued. Thus, weekly administration of 200 units of this
drug inhibited the occurrence of new vertebral fractures from
early on, and the risk of fractures had already dropped 53.90
versus the placebo after 24 weeks. The inhibitory effect of
this drug on bone fractures also tended to intensify as
administration continued.
[0133]
The incidence of vertebral fractures (new + worsening)
after 72 weeks by Kaplan-Meier estimation in the FAS of the
fracture study was 3.56 in the PTH200 group and 16.3% in the P
group. The incidence with 200 units of this drug was lower
than in the placebo group (log rank test, p < 0.0001). Two
hundred units of this drug also lowered the risk of vertebral
fractures (new + worsening) 78.6% in comparison to the placebo
88
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
after 72 weeks. When the six-month vertebral fracture (new +
worsening) incidence was compared between groups, the
incidence of the PTH200 group was lower than that of the P
group in all divisions consisting of within 24 weeks, 24 to 48
weeks, and 48 to 72 weeks.
[0134]
(J) Effects of test drug administration on the urinary
calcium and serum calcium of osteoporosis patients
The test drug group was listed as the "PTH200 group" and
the control group as the "P group." The results of studying
the changes in the urinary calcium value and corrected serum
calcium value when the test drug or control was administered
to patients once a week for 72 weeks are shown (Figures 4 and
5).
The average (and median) percentage change in the urinary
calcium value was 3.2% (-14.7%) in the PTH200 group and 23.6%
(1.6%) in the P group after 72 weeks in comparison to at the
start. A tendency to decrease was seen in the PTH200 group in
comparison to the P group.
The corrected serum calcium value fluctuated with a range
of an average of 9.3 to 9.6 mg/dL in both groups. The
corrected serum calcium value of the PTH200 group after
administration had a minimum of 8.5 mg/dL (after 48 and 72
weeks) and a maximum of 11.6 mg/dL (after 4 weeks). In the P
group, it had a minimum of 8.5 mg/dL (after 4 weeks) and a
89
CA 02772656 2012-02-28
maximum of 12.1 mg/dL (after 12 weeks). No large fluctuations
were found in either group.
No adverse effects of serum calcium elevation or
depression were found in this study.
No manifestation of hypercalcemia or hypercalciuria was
found in the PTH200 group in comparison to the P group in this
study.
INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY
[0135]
The method for treating/preventing osteoporosis and
inhibiting/preventing bone fractures of the present invention
is excellent in terms of both efficacy and safety, and the
method for inhibiting bone fractures of the present invention
is highly safe. Both are groundbreaking medical techniques
that contribute significantly to the treatment of osteoporosis
and the like and the inhibition/prevention of bone fractures.
The osteoporosis therapeutic/prophylactic agent and agent for
the inhibition/prevention of bone fractures of the present
invention are therefore extremely useful in the pharmaceutical
industry for these purposes.
